First off I think you are taking this far too seriously and need to calm down, you've painted me and my report into something it most certainly wasn't intended for. Perhaps some on these forums don't know me as well as on DPR where I post a lot more regularly, I do find it tough to follow multiple forums, just not enough time in the day really.
Just how many reviews rate Pentax poorly due to tracking ability? So what is my report showing, a real world situation with accurate honest results in the realm of AF tracking. As for the bicycle test that was in direct response to DPRs poor results in the same format of test. I'm reporting for those of us who use tracking and are maybe discouraged by the fact that other brands do better and Pentax is being bashed for it. I am most certainly not bashing Pentax as you suggest below, you've put far too much emphasis into one word (sarcasm) of the title of the post and totally disregard the text of the post.
Good for you, maybe its the camera, maybe its the camera and the lens, maybe its your skill level, maybe you have faster reflexes and they had slower reflexes. I don't deny that Pentax "CAN" acquire focus lock faster with "SOME" lenses, ever try your style with the 77Ltd or DA*50-135 or DA*55? You may be rather disappointed in their focus speed.
Put a different lens on, get a different result! Not all lenses acquire focus quickly and some are far faster than others like many of the SMC-F-series lenses.
Yes it is the only important one when the test is for tracking specifically, Had I wanted to see what the results would be compared with not tracking I'd have done a sequence or series of sequences with your method. Given that I didn't then that was not in purview of my intended test and following report
Given that the whole test and report was formulated around AF tracking then any reference to AF in the title or report is referring to AF tracking... Did I ever say Pentax AF (not related to tracking!!!) is inferior???? Or did you just take it that way reading too much into the report with your own bias?
There you go again, blaming the title and ignoring the content. I do apologize to those who didn't understand that the reference to "Ugly" was sarcasm and a play on words as the subject matter for the test is totally cute, perhaps I should have put a smiley face beside the word "ugly". The flip side is the ugly also refers to not just showing the successful results but the bad results as well.
That Pentax isn't as good at tracking rarely needs proving, what it needs is clarification. Far too often there are anecdotal points made that system x is better than Pentax for AF tracking, but what does better mean and what does Pentax being worse mean... its super subjective and rarely ever does anyone provide a clear example showing not only the good but the bad too. My reports aren't meant to Pentax bash but to clarify the truth of the matter, to show what the system is capable of rather than just saying the system isn't as good as the competition which is pretty vague.
I too get tired of this, It doesn't matter if the camera is designed as a field camera, its the camera I chose and I'll shoot whatever the heck I choose to shoot with it no matter what people think its limitations are... I even have shot sequences of swallows in flight with the K-1 original which is seriously tough and absolutely needs AF-C and the skill to follow the bird at telephoto focal lengths. I've shot red bull air races with a manual focus mirror lens (yes with CIF assist), I shoot at least 50% of my hockey photos with a manual focus lens, I shoot airshows, Aussie rules football, figure 8 races, dirt bike racing, birding, wildlife and a whole host of other things that Pentax isn't supposed to be good at as some would have us believe. Pentax is as good as the user behind it where skill is necessary, however it could be better where other camera succeed in offloading some skill in the form of AF tracking.
I don't shoot any bike racing, its not my cup of tea. I absolutely don't accept any fault in using the camera for more than what other random people think its only good for. I also don't appreciate the idea that one will put the camera in such a box. I will constantly push the bounds of what others have been brainwashed into thinking the camera is capable of because with the right skill and knowing the system just about any subject matter can be covered. Maybe some not as well or consistent as with other systems but that shouldn't stop someone who wants to use their chosen gear in situations that are tough for their chosen gear. Pentax may only be the wrong gear for the job if the desired is to be a payed professional who has the demand of plenty of consistent results. I am a hobbyist I don't have the demand of a payed professional, I don't need nor want to buy another brands camera system. This doesn't mean I don't desire improvement in the Pentax system but in spite of where Pentax is lacking I'll still use it to show and prove the naysayers wrong.
You are seriously over defending Pentax, so much so you misinterpreted my report as anti-Pentax when in reality I'm super pro-Pentax and my report was to show what Pentax is capable of in the real world in spite of its weaknesses!
Again, you are far far too focused on one word of the title and seem to be ignoring the content... Its amazing for me to be called a Pentax basher, those who know me, my history and my experience would know I'm a fierce Pentax supporter who will still post honest results and reports about areas Pentax could see improvement.
Please step back, re-examine what I wrote from a completely different bias than the one you've developed through misunderstanding the reason of the report. You'll see I'm pro Pentax, you'll see I'm showing honest results of what Pentax is capable of so that others can see and not have to rely on all those lies and half truths about Pentax not being up to the job. Why do I shoot tough subjects that require tracking and skill, because its a challenge, because I can and to show the rest of the community that it can be done with Pentax!!! It has nothing to do with Pentax can't its all about Pentax CAN!!!!! But still with lots of room for improvement!
---------- Post added 06-24-18 at 12:42 PM ----------
Image-resource did a test, within the constraints of the test they came to the conclusion that recent Pentax cameras have fast target acquisition time with the lenses and camera used, and those acquisition times are faster than what they compared with in other brands. If someone can find the article and post a link please do so to allow others to better understand how the results were achieved. I suspect one would find the speed of focus acquisition is highly depended on the subject, whether its moving, whether the user is holding the camera steady (think long telephoto) which camera and what lens is being used. So unless the test is exhaustive in testing comparable setups one can only come to the conclusion that Pentax AF acquisition time is faster than other brands for a given setup and test target, YMMV with you're using something different than what was tested.
