|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-09-2016, 12:50 PM
|
| |
I'd like to urge fellow members to approach criticism with a level-headed attitude. Every camera has its flaws and while DPR may have exaggerated its negativity regarding the K-1's AF, it's probably fair to say that there are other cameras out there that can do better.
One could speculate that DPR might simply not have the experience with Pentax equipment needed to obtain ideal tracking results. In any case, their findings certainly don't discredit the fact that the K-1 is an amazing value and a compelling FF camera to more than just current Pentax owners.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-08-2016, 06:50 PM
|
| |
Yup, I'm not sure about all the negativity.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
07-08-2016, 06:12 PM
|
| |
This would imply that the K-1 has worse AF performance than the K-3, which almost certainly isn't the case.
Did you have the "hold AF" setting set to off? If not, this would add a delay before the camera attempts to re-acquire focus, and it could explain the outcome.
I think with practice and the right technique, you'll be able to greatly increase your keeper rate. Replacing the lens might eventually become necessary if your standards are high, but it shouldn't be needed for a slow-paced subject like the one in your test.
Remember than SEL-9 assumes that you keep a single AF point within the grid pointed at what you want to be sharp. If this isn't the case, repeat the test with auto-9 instead. In that mode the camera will maintain focus on what's closest within the 9-point matrix, rather the prioritizing a single point.
Pentax AF motors are slower (and the one in the DA* 300mm is noticeably slower than the best Pentax offers, which are the DC motors), and yes, I don't think the hardware in SAFOX is quite as advanced as what Nikon or Canon uses. Still, it's not supposed to be this bad.
|
