[Wheatfield]

if i had $50K lens investment in Pentax an was not happy, i would sell and
i would go out and buy myself a brand new
Nikon D3x 24.5MP FX Digital SLR
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Lens ,
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Lens ,
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF Lens ,
Nikon SB-900 AF Speedlight Flash

it is better to lose something,
rather than stay with what will make you miserable.
life is too short,
Photography is suppose to be fun

it comes back to an article i read from Thom Hogan about tripods
we set out to buy a tripod, and find the good one is way to expensive, so over time we buy cheaper ones that don't meet our expectations. until one day we end up with the expensive one we looked at first, now at this time, we have spent 3 times what we could have spent if we bought the good one first.

Dave

See my post a few up about people with more hubris than brains.
You just don't get it.

[RiceHigh]

They unfortunately dropped the 11-points system on the K-m and its 5 points are cluttered in the center of the frame, so basically it's a one point AF camera. It's fast but it losts the off-center points.

I think Pentax has (re-)mastered some techniques now and they should be able to do better with the next mid-class model which replaces the K20.

[dafiryde]

See my post a few up about people with more hubris than brains.
You just don't get it.

have you tried the update firmware , i have read on other forums , some have seen a difference in AF performance

Dave

[Wheatfield]

have you tried the update firmware , i have read on other forums , some have seen a difference in AF performance

Dave

I just updated my K20 a few minutes ago. My DA*55/1.4 is as slow now as it was yesterday.
I haven't tried any other lenses, but what I'm hearing is that improvement are at best incremental, and really relate more to hunting and lock on than the time it takes to get there.
Unfortunately, to make a real improvement, they will need to go to stronger motors with more agressive gearing and dedicate a processor to AF control.
This is a hardware change that no amount of software tweaking is going to fix.
The DA*55/1.4 is really a step backwards in the AF department. MY FA50/1.4 is at least 3 times faster than it, as is my DA70mm/LTD.
This is very dissapointing, because it tell me that Pentax isn't taking the performance concerns seriously, and are integrating technologies that are inferior to what they have been using in the past.
I'm also willing to believe that the K20 isn't able to fully integrate SDM technology and that a new camera body might do better, but I can't help but think that with the AF drive in the lens, the lazy AF speed is an integral part of the lens, and nothing will make it faster.
For my purposes, this is fine, I bought the 55/1.4 as a portrait lens, and for the most part, my subjects aren't trying to get away, so the speed isn't so much of a concern in my application, and any concerns I have are more than compensated for by the glass itself, which is way beyond superb.
However, for someone who wants a general purpose short telephoto, the AF speed might well be a huge dissapointment.

I'll give you a hint about why you don't get it in relation to my complaints about camera performance vs changing brands:
Photography (like most things in life) is all about compromise.
In my situation, I am compromising camera performance because Pentax lenses are enough better than competitors glass that I will tolerate the weak areas of the camera bodies.
However, I also know that Pentax has the ability to build high performance equipment if they so choose, and I would like them to choose to make a better Pentax.
I am also familiar enough with the ways of internet forums to realize that no matter what they build, it will never be good enough for some people.
Having said that, there is ample room for them to improve things like AF speed, and I am willing to pay a premium for a body that has higher performance.
I also think that enough other people would be willing to do it, enough so that the camera would be profitable for them on it's own, as well as profitable for them in that it would attract more buyers of lower end models who base their purchase decisions on upgrade paths that they have no intention of taking.

[dafiryde]

sorry to hear you are having so much problems with the 55/1.4, for i have always wanted to get a 50/1.4, or sigma 30/1.4 , to be used especially for low light, but been having a serious camera bag problem, 4 bags in 3 months, and back to the domke f3
sometimes technolgy seems to be going backwards on a whole, back home here i have a Datsun vechicle- with carberator -plugs-points-condensor, and yet these new vechicles with fuel injected-no distributor-brain box , gets 1/2 the gas milage i get with mine.
i think it is marketing stratigies, to get us to buy more, by not giving us what we should get.
face it , Pentax is fully aware of the problems in their systems, like what you are harping about, but if they came out with a body that corrected these flaws, you will not have any reason to upgrade, hence they loose a camera body sale

Dave

[kenyee]

sorry to hear you are having so much problems with the 55/1.4, for i have always wanted to get a 50/1.4, or sigma 30/1.4 ,

If AF is a high priority, you and wheatfields might want to try the 30/1.4 HSM. A friend who has it on his Nikon system thinks it focuses pretty fast for a non-Nikon AF-S lens

The 55/1.4 has always had reports of slowness focusing. Nikon's new 35/1.8 also has lots of complaints even though it uses a ring motor. Seems like it's a lens design issue that manufacturers have to make some tradeoff to do...

[res3567]

Come on, can't we give this tired old saw a rest? Have you even looked at how good auto focus has evolved photography?


So you are happy with a sub performing camera.
Good for you.

And he bought a Canon after they buggered him once? I just can't say enough about what I think of that move.


You just hit on the two strengths Pentax has compared to Canon, though the lenses are getting more expensive, and Pentax compromised this strength by hobbling the DSLR lens mount.
Why don't we ask for a better Pentax instead? They can charge more money for it, thereby increasing cash flow, the users that want or need the higher performance will have what they want, which will shut most of us up, the brand will have a top end camera in the stable to attract new users, thereby increasing sales of the lower end cameras (cash flow again), and anyone that is happy with a weak camera can just buy one of the lower priced cameras.

When I bought into Pentax initially, they were pretty much head to head with front end of the performance curve. Based on many factors, that being one of them, I (and many other people, I am sure) made a heavy investment in the brand.
Over the past couple of decades, I (and a lot of others) have watched them slip farther and farther back, to the point they can barely see the leading edge that they were once so close to.
Now I'm not one of the people who feels they owe me anything,
I'm just one of those people who is dissapointed with them at the moment.
I'm one of those people who would buy a better Pentax if it was made available.
If you aren't, thats fine, you have the option of staying with lower end cameras. I'd just like the option of buying something better, and I am tired of the mindless apologists saying that I need to improve my technique, or that I need to practice, or that what's good enough for them would be good enough for me if I just stopped taking umbrage with their insulting attitude.
I'm really tired of the hubris of these a-holes who just don't get it.

Goodness man,

I give a take and I get this in return?

YES, I am happy with the camera.

YES, I wish it did perform better.

YES, I would buy a better Pentax body if and when they put it on the market

YES, autofocus was one of the greatest if not THE greatest invention for photograpy.

YES, I can agree with a lot of what you have to say.

I am not trying to insult you or tell you about what you can do to improve your technique.

I merely try to give an inteligent take on the whole topic concerning the poor performance of my K10D and a quick remedy if I were to get into a bind(which has already happened at a wedding).

I don't consider my D-SLR a sub par camera; it has and still is serving me well.

I TRULY HOPE Pentax gets it's act together and takes it to the next level. I think they proved they can when they released the K10D.

They are evolving, but slowly and I can understand your frustration.

[CharlieO]

These were taken Thursday evening with overcast skys, thunderstorms a mile to the north of me, high winds, K10, Tamron 70-300 LD DI (a known slow focusing lens), 1/250, F5.6, ISO 200 on a monopod. The picture was modified in PSE 6 because I underexposed it about 1 stop. Both pictures are the same. The second one is about a 20% crop. I cannot think of anything harder to focus on and meter than a deer running at a full sprint accross a field with a constantly changing background (contrast) and leaping into the high grass. The wind was blowing approximately 20 knots. Yes, anyone can pixel peep it at 100% so have fun doing it on a low resolution picture. My K10D is my wildlife camera because it beats my Nikon D80 hands down in focusing through trees and brush, has built in SR and weather sealing. The center focus point, which I almost exclusively use on both cameras, is remarkably more accurate on the K10D. Now, is my Nikon D80 junk? NO WAY. I love both cameras and use them for their strengths. I wish my K10 had as good lowlight performance as the D80. I limit, because of my tastes, my Pentax to ISO 1000-1250. The Nikon is happy at 1600. Do I want Pentax to improve the AF and high ISO performance, you bet. I may sound like I am coming off a little strong, if so I apologize. I just wanted to show anyone questioning whether to purchase a Pentax camera that the AF does work. Please, everyone, lets go take pictures!

[res3567]

These were taken Thursday evening with overcast skys, thunderstorms a mile to the north of me, high winds, K10, Tamron 70-300 LD DI (a known slow focusing lens), 1/250, F5.6, ISO 200 on a monopod. The picture was modified in PSE 6 because I underexposed it about 1 stop. Both pictures are the same. The second one is about a 20% crop. I cannot think of anything harder to focus on and meter than a deer running at a full sprint accross a field with a constantly changing background (contrast) and leaping into the high grass. The wind was blowing approximately 20 knots. Yes, anyone can pixel peep it at 100% so have fun doing it on a low resolution picture. My K10D is my wildlife camera because it beats my Nikon D80 hands down in focusing through trees and brush, has built in SR and weather sealing. The center focus point, which I almost exclusively use on both cameras, is remarkably more accurate on the K10D. Now, is my Nikon D80 junk? NO WAY. I love both cameras and use them for their strengths. I wish my K10 had as good lowlight performance as the D80. I limit, because of my tastes, my Pentax to ISO 1000-1250. The Nikon is happy at 1600. Do I want Pentax to improve the AF and high ISO performance, you bet. I may sound like I am coming off a little strong, if so I apologize. I just wanted to show anyone questioning whether to purchase a Pentax camera that the AF does work. Please, everyone, lets go take pictures!

I agree! The poor AF performance I encounter with my K10D is in low light. Other than that it is a GREAT camera!

Excellent pics BTW!

[OregonJim]

Come on, can't we give this tired old saw a rest? Have you even looked at how good auto focus has evolved photography?

I don't want to downplay the importance of AF to some people, but I'll bet that if even half the photographers who complain about it actually knew how to MF properly, we wouldn't be having such heated discussions. AF is great, AF is evolving, but most (not all) of the complaints are about low light, low contrast situations in which MF is and always will be the better option. The camera is a tool (that's another tired old saw) - what the tool lacks must be compensated for by the user's skill. You can buy a more expensive tool that requires less skill, or you can improve your skill so that you can use any tool available.

edit: Wheatfield - I'm not in any way implying anything about YOUR skill - just wanted to make that clear as you seem to be a bit quick to jump on people as of late. I know you're frustrated about your 55/1.4.

[alderfall]

I kept wondering why it seems to be to me that I don't fear this ultimate robot programmed to destroy called "slow AF".

Now, thanks to your insightful post, I see that I am not alone in my confusion over this whole increasing AF speed debate.

Jason

I don't want to downplay the importance of AF to some people, but I'll bet that if even half the photographers who complain about it actually knew how to MF properly, we wouldn't be having such heated discussions. AF is great, AF is evolving, but most (not all) of the complaints are about low light, low contrast situations in which MF is and always will be the better option. The camera is a tool (that's another tired old saw) - what the tool lacks must be compensated for by the user's skill. You can buy a more expensive tool that requires less skill, or you can improve your skill so that you can use any tool available.

[dafiryde]

[QUOTE=res3567;555655]I agree! The poor AF performance I encounter with my K10D is in low light. Other than that it is a GREAT camera!

I agree with that statement 100%, and when in that spot, usually during low light conditions i switch to manual focus, and back in the K1000 days took approx. 0.5 seconds and still does.

We rely too much on technology to get by in life these days, and some how forget to use our natural human instincts.

Dave

[palmor]

You know what cracks me up. People who complain that the people complaining about AF issues are whiners. It seems to me those people are just as much whiners as the people their complaining about... and the circle just keeps going around.

I guess in the end we all just a bunch of whiners unless we never post a thread other then "Hey, look at my photo"



John

[Vylen]

You know what cracks me up. People who complain that the people complaining about AF issues are whiners. It seems to me those people are just as much whiners as the people their complaining about... and the circle just keeps going around.

I guess in the end we all just a bunch of whiners unless we never post a thread other then "Hey, look at my photo"



John

thats why i said, this thread is full of waaah

:P

[ManuH]

These were taken Thursday evening with overcast skys, thunderstorms a mile to the north of me, high winds, K10, Tamron 70-300 LD DI (a known slow focusing lens), 1/250, F5.6, ISO 200 on a monopod.

It's OK but honestly it's not what I would call a difficult target at that distance. At least as evidenced by your pictures it's not difficult conditions for the K10D/K20D.

Now try to fill the frame at 300mm f/5.6 with a target moving towards you and let's see if you get as much keepers. True, any camera will struggle under these conditions but my point is that *compared* to the other competitors Pentax is performing the worse.