Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images

Started Jul 7, 2016 | Discussions
MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images
17

Alright so in short notice this is what I put together, I've been very busy today, haven't had a moment to pause but while out I got this sequence. Sorry its not in triplicate either.

I never promised perfection, nor did I say it was as good as other brands, all I'm suggesting is that its better than the DPR results show.

I used the Sigma 100-300mm F4.0 EX DG on the K-1, I used SEL-33, I initially took a few photos without the intent to do a burst AF-tracking test then decided to do one so refocused and started the sequence, the original few photos were not included. In SEL-33 like in any SEL mode one has to focus on the desired subject and acquire lock before bursting to obtain best results, that subject also has to stay inside the active focus point zone during the burst or you're guaranteed the camera will likely lose focus and likely won't re-obtain focus without the users intervention. I set my AF hold to medium, I usually use low and have tried high on occasion and if the action is very erratic but the subject is against a nothing background I'll consider turning AF hold off. These were done handheld however I didn't keep the initial focus target in the center of the frame nor did I zoom out which is something I'd normally do. These were shot at 300mm and F5.6 I'd suggest the subject was moving faster than the cyclist and based on head sizes is likely of a similar magnification, yes 300mm F5.6 affords me a little more forgiveness than 200mm F2.8 but only by less than a stop of DOF. I have to apologize as the subject isn't moving perfectly 100% directly at the camera, however I would like to suggest its close enough.

Here are the 15 original files, edited in an old version of ACR (5.7), ACR's sharpening and NR were whatever the default is, I've really never bothered to adjust it. I didn't use any camera profiles either. Its taken over 45 minutes to upload all these files, from ACR to photoshop to save no alterations passed ACR. The files are 18-21mb each

http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09593x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09594x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09595x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09596x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09597x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09598x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09599x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09600x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09601x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09602x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09603x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09604x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09605x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09606x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09607x.jpg

Here is a string of 1:1 crops (1200x800 each) centered on the persons head, no sharpening, no resizing (View original as always)

[9.7mb] http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/afcrops.jpg

Here is the scene for the purpose of showing how the subject moved around the frame during the sequence, these are obviously resized and sharpened so don't make any conclusions about the AF or DOF as at this size such failings are minimized and therefore not accurate. I repeat this is only to demonstrate how the subject move around the frame.

[13.7mb] http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/afscenes.jpg

Now I'm sure someone can tell me what I did wrong and I'm sure you all can figure out how many are in focus and how many aren't, I'll give you a hint, its better than 15%. Perhaps in the near future someone including myself could put together a more similar test to the DPR test but until then enjoy at least something that resembles their AF test.

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

Pentax K-1
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
soheil Veteran Member • Posts: 3,022
Sorry Mike but your test is not valid
3

unless the subject was pedaling or in this case paddling.

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Soheil
------------------------------
It's the singer not the song.

 soheil's gear list:soheil's gear list
Pentax Optio 330GS Pentax MX-1 Pentax K-7 Pentax K-5 Pentax K-5 IIs +19 more
OP MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Re: Sorry Mike but your test is not valid

soheil wrote:

unless the subject was pedaling or in this case paddling.

LOL while i was out there was a guy paddling his kayak, i did consider posting it for good fun but i decided not to. In fact out of 20 shots using Auto-33 IIRC there were 4-5 in the middle where the camera decided to front focus (his arms and paddle kept moving in front of his face) and 1 at the end that was out of focus... granted he wasn't moving too fast so i suspect not valid enough, but fun none the less.

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

soheil Veteran Member • Posts: 3,022
Re: Sorry Mike but your test is not valid

Nice job Mike. I was hoping for more of this from the people who own K1.

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Soheil
------------------------------
It's the singer not the song.

 soheil's gear list:soheil's gear list
Pentax Optio 330GS Pentax MX-1 Pentax K-7 Pentax K-5 Pentax K-5 IIs +19 more
OP MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Re: Sorry Mike but your test is not valid
1

soheil wrote:

Nice job Mike. I was hoping for more of this from the people who own K1.

Not all of us can just drop everything grab a cyclist off the streets, shoot them a bunch of times and then do the tedious task of throwing the results together providing the full res images. geez, i just uploaded over 300mb to my website... certainly doesn't happen often. It will take time for more user tests to show up, it just doesn't happen over night.

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

robbo d Senior Member • Posts: 2,766
My own skateboard example ....
2

Tells a different story to dpr.

I got a near 100% hit but the car coming into frame put that to rest.

If you havent already seen it. Check down in the forum.

I'm not sure how dpr got that result..... maybe a cyclist coming head on at a single plane is a weakness ?? Or just a crock of garbage.

I find it very competent.

OP MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Re: My own skateboard example ....

robbo d wrote:

Tells a different story to dpr.

I got a near 100% hit but the car coming into frame put that to rest.

They'll poke holes in your example, 210mm but at F6.3, did you zoom during the test i didn't check, where was the focus point or did it focus on any "random" part of the skate boarder? as in did it track or was it given such a large subject in the frame that it didn't have much else to focus on. I'm not trying to downplay your contribution, just trying to show you how they may not see it as not as stringent as their test despite it being valid.

If you havent already seen it. Check down in the forum.

I'm not sure how dpr got that result..... maybe a cyclist coming head on at a single plane is a weakness ?? Or just a crock of garbage.

I find it very competent.

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

OP MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Posted this 10 hours ago
6

This is interesting, Rishi was active in the forum up to as recently as 5 hours ago, the usual trolls were all over the forum in the last 10 hours and with the massive controversy the subject ignited evidenced by hundreds of posts across at least a half dozen threads I'd have expected this post to get some attention beyond a few supporting comments.

They requested 100% crops, I supplied them, they requested whole images, I supplied them, they requested a long burst of a subject moving in a similar x-y-z nature, I supplied it. I fully explained the methodology, gear used and situation including minor information about the shots before this. I even dropped in my opinions on the focus features and where i believe they should be used and how i believe they should be used.

The question is where are "they" now?

Oh its fine to tell a person that their examples in galleries for the public and personal enjoyment are cherry picked and resized and sharpened and there are no sequences and this is wrong and that is wrong and they're at infinity and if the background is at infinity and if i used a canon camera with high quality glass I'd get better images with no regards for consideration of the amount of cropping done or condition during the taking some of those images. that information would be know had they seen the original posting, I suppose I'm part to blame for not linking that information to the post. But still if its that easy to criticize (and it is, I can be put in that group too) then what happened to all the critics?

But when one answers the challenge and does it politely and provides all relevant information and the challengers ignore it, wow what integrity! Perhaps I should have used an outrageous title to get attention.

Maybe we can provide some valid excuses, they might have missed this thread, they might have taken an extensive time downloading the files and are still going through them so haven't had time to comment.

I'm trying very hard not to say they don't care about the truth because I believe they do otherwise why would they argue so hard their opinion just a day ago?

I hope they either just missed this evidence or have been too busy to reply, i really don't want it to be that they are ignoring this example.

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

flektogon
flektogon Veteran Member • Posts: 3,668
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images
2

Mike, you are one the most experienced Pentax users and there is no doubt that you have mastered the Pentax cameras to the maximum possible level. But this still doesn't mean that Pentax, in comparison to (some) other camera makers can't lag behind, in this particular case, in the continuous AF performance. Maybe that Pentax just needs to make the AF feature more user friendly, as not every one is willing to spend half of the life to master the camera . But definitely, it's not only the DPR who's found the Pentax AF functionality lagging behind.

Regards,

Peter

OP MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images
6

flektogon wrote:

Mike, you are one the most experienced Pentax users and there is no doubt that you have mastered the Pentax cameras to the maximum possible level.

People on the forum have referred to me as an expert or a master or a really skilled photographer... Maybe but all I did was point the camera at a subject, half press, when I saw it was tracking I full pressed and didn't maintain the initial focus subject in the dead center of the frame as I was being a little sloppy. I believe even a kid if given a little instruction on what to do could have done the same.

But this still doesn't mean that Pentax, in comparison to (some) other camera makers can't lag behind, in this particular case, in the continuous AF performance.

You must have missed some of my opening remarks and stuff I've repeated many times over the last 2 days and many many more times over the years. I never said Pentax would produce a perfect result, I never said Pentax would be as good as the other brands, and when it comes to the last couple days all I've ever said was that it can do better than the results posted by DPR.

Maybe that Pentax just needs to make the AF feature more user friendly, as not every one is willing to spend half of the life to master the camera .

Wow what half a lifetime, I got my K10D just over 9 years ago, coming from 2 previous years of super zooms and previous to that 1 year with a petty 6x P&S zoom... before all that all i ever used was disposables oh and one film P&S with a plastic 28mm lens. Sure it would be nice if the AF system did more thinking for you and i won't stand in the way of that until it starts getting to the point that absolutely no skill is necessary.

But definitely, it's not only the DPR who's found the Pentax AF functionality lagging behind.

I never once said it wasn't lagging, I've probably complained about Pentax AF more than DPR but you'd have to read through thousands of posts over the last decade to see all my complaints and how many times i too was jumped on for finding flaws others didn't like to hear about.

I'm just clearly pointing out that its not lagging as much as described in the most recent review, Plain and simple it could have done better that their results show.

Regards,

Peter

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

Conjure
Conjure Contributing Member • Posts: 584
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images
2

Mike! Thanks a lot!

Maybe Pentax AF is not class leading. And for sure terrible AF-performance can be proven by not considering the small focus point coverage:

fatdeeman Regular Member • Posts: 213
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images
1

This is still vastly different to the bike test so difficult to compare directly, for starters the subject has a lot more lateral movement rather than coming directly at the camera but I have to say out of all the examples of this camera doing AF-C these are the most convincing and the ones that seem to most contradict dpreviews findings.

 fatdeeman's gear list:fatdeeman's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Canon IXUS 310 HS Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony a6000 +21 more
OP MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images
1

fatdeeman wrote:

This is still vastly different to the bike test so difficult to compare directly, for starters the subject has a lot more lateral movement rather than coming directly at the camera but I have to say out of all the examples of this camera doing AF-C these are the most convincing and the ones that seem to most contradict dpreviews findings.

I appreciate your fair and honest remarks regarding the test and rightfully pointing out concerns that make it not 100% the same. give it some time and I'm sure you'll see the forum a flood with cyclist photo sequences with varying degrees of success.

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

kewlguy
kewlguy Senior Member • Posts: 1,952
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images

My biggest complaint is the way DPR described the Cons with "Poor AF performance." That's it, as if the single AF does not work either. Many people would read straight to the pros and cons box and that statement is misleading. The single AF works very well and should be fine for most users. Makes me think maybe DPR slams Pentax for a reason?

 kewlguy's gear list:kewlguy's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Canon EOS 6D Nikon 1 J5 Sony a7R III Sony a7 III +87 more
robgendreau Veteran Member • Posts: 5,880
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images

Thanks. I don't have a dog in this hunt, but if I were testing AF I would consider a messy background with near and far objects of varying sizes around the subject a much tougher test than sky and water.

Not that these results don't have validity; they do (especially for we who like BIF shots).

-- hide signature --

“Art is not what you see, but what you make others see.”
— Edgar Degas

 robgendreau's gear list:robgendreau's gear list
Pentax K-1 II Pentax FA* 50mm F1.4 SDM AW
Rishi Sanyal
Rishi Sanyal dpreview Admin • Posts: 850
Re: Posted this 10 hours ago
7

MightyMike wrote:

This is interesting, Rishi was active in the forum up to as recently as 5 hours ago, the usual trolls were all over the forum in the last 10 hours and with the massive controversy the subject ignited evidenced by hundreds of posts across at least a half dozen threads I'd have expected this post to get some attention beyond a few supporting comments.

They requested 100% crops, I supplied them, they requested whole images, I supplied them, they requested a long burst of a subject moving in a similar x-y-z nature, I supplied it. I fully explained the methodology, gear used and situation including minor information about the shots before this. I even dropped in my opinions on the focus features and where i believe they should be used and how i believe they should be used.

The question is where are "they" now?

So you posted this around midnight our time last night, and for every one of you there are dozens more making a grand total of hundreds more comments and threads. Furthermore, we actually have jobs here, mine which is actually to evolve DPR testing and technically edit almost everything that goes up on DPR, and you're wondering/suspicious/questioning our integrity because I personally haven't responded to one of the hundreds of comments being made here?

Do you appreciate the chances of me even finding this thread were exceedingly low? It appears many of you are completely oblivious to the scale of this operation. Which is, frankly, perplexing - it shouldn't be too hard for you to take a look at the hundreds upon hundreds of comments and forum posts that have piled up, and yet you expect DPR's Technical Editor to personally come in and see it all, despite monitoring forums being <1% of my job description?

Do I have your permission to actually take an evening off and spend it with my wife? How about sleep - do I have your permission to do that? Especially considering I was up until 4 am fielding comments on a review I didn't even write the previous night?

Oh its fine to tell a person that their examples in galleries for the public and personal enjoyment are cherry picked and resized and sharpened and there are no sequences and this is wrong and that is wrong and they're at infinity and if the background is at infinity and if i used a canon camera with high quality glass I'd get better images with no regards for consideration of the amount of cropping done or condition during the taking some of those images. that information would be know had they seen the original posting, I suppose I'm part to blame for not linking that information to the post. But still if its that easy to criticize (and it is, I can be put in that group too) then what happened to all the critics?

But when one answers the challenge and does it politely and provides all relevant information and the challengers ignore it, wow what integrity! Perhaps I should have used an outrageous title to get attention.

Maybe we can provide some valid excuses, they might have missed this thread, they might have taken an extensive time downloading the files and are still going through them so haven't had time to comment.

I'm trying very hard not to say they don't care about the truth because I believe they do otherwise why would they argue so hard their opinion just a day ago?

I hope they either just missed this evidence or have been too busy to reply, i really don't want it to be that they are ignoring this example.

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

-- hide signature --

Rishi Sanyal, Ph.D
Deputy Editor, Technical Editor | Digital Photography Review
dpreview.com (work) | rishi.photography (personal)

 Rishi Sanyal's gear list:Rishi Sanyal's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Nikon D810 Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.5 1-5x Macro Nikon 85mm F1.8G Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +3 more
Confused of Malvern Senior Member • Posts: 1,333
Re: Posted this 10 hours ago
3

Rishi

OK you've made your point (although I don't think you needed to be quite so sarcastic in doing so).  You've been busy and you've only just seen the post - that's fair enough.  But now you have seen it, what's your response to the test Mike has uploaded please?  Is his test flawed or is there enough there to merit further investigation by DPR?

-- hide signature --

Confused of Malvern
'The greatest fool can ask more than the wisest man can answer'

 Confused of Malvern's gear list:Confused of Malvern's gear list
Canon G7 X II Pentax K-3 +1 more
Rishi Sanyal
Rishi Sanyal dpreview Admin • Posts: 850
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images
2

MightyMike wrote:

Alright so in short notice this is what I put together, I've been very busy today, haven't had a moment to pause but while out I got this sequence. Sorry its not in triplicate either.

I never promised perfection, nor did I say it was as good as other brands, all I'm suggesting is that its better than the DPR results show.

I used the Sigma 100-300mm F4.0 EX DG on the K-1, I used SEL-33, I initially took a few photos without the intent to do a burst AF-tracking test then decided to do one so refocused and started the sequence, the original few photos were not included. In SEL-33 like in any SEL mode one has to focus on the desired subject and acquire lock before bursting to obtain best results, that subject also has to stay inside the active focus point zone during the burst or you're guaranteed the camera will likely lose focus and likely won't re-obtain focus without the users intervention. I set my AF hold to medium, I usually use low and have tried high on occasion and if the action is very erratic but the subject is against a nothing background I'll consider turning AF hold off. These were done handheld however I didn't keep the initial focus target in the center of the frame nor did I zoom out which is something I'd normally do. These were shot at 300mm and F5.6 I'd suggest the subject was moving faster than the cyclist and based on head sizes is likely of a similar magnification, yes 300mm F5.6 affords me a little more forgiveness than 200mm F2.8 but only by less than a stop of DOF. I have to apologize as the subject isn't moving perfectly 100% directly at the camera, however I would like to suggest its close enough.

Here are the 15 original files, edited in an old version of ACR (5.7), ACR's sharpening and NR were whatever the default is, I've really never bothered to adjust it. I didn't use any camera profiles either. Its taken over 45 minutes to upload all these files, from ACR to photoshop to save no alterations passed ACR. The files are 18-21mb each

http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09593x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09594x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09595x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09596x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09597x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09598x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09599x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09600x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09601x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09602x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09603x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09604x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09605x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09606x.jpg
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/_K1P09607x.jpg

Here is a string of 1:1 crops (1200x800 each) centered on the persons head, no sharpening, no resizing (View original as always)

[9.7mb] http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/afcrops.jpg

Here is the scene for the purpose of showing how the subject moved around the frame during the sequence, these are obviously resized and sharpened so don't make any conclusions about the AF or DOF as at this size such failings are minimized and therefore not accurate. I repeat this is only to demonstrate how the subject move around the frame.

[13.7mb] http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/k-1/aftest/afscenes.jpg

Now I'm sure someone can tell me what I did wrong and I'm sure you all can figure out how many are in focus and how many aren't, I'll give you a hint, its better than 15%. Perhaps in the near future someone including myself could put together a more similar test to the DPR test but until then enjoy at least something that resembles their AF test.

First of all, thanks for doing this. I like how you've made it easy for us to see the results by compiling crops in addition to providing full-resolution images. That's exactly how it should be done.

Second, calm down, as I've suggested to you below. You are one of hundreds of commenters and thousands of comments that we cannot personally sift through every day, especially when doing so constitutes less than 1% of my job duties/description. In fact, many of us sacrifice our personal time and/or sleep to respond to you. We're human, and the last thing we want to see - when we're sacrificing our own sleep to respond to often petulant comments resulting from not even reading the reviews we work hard on - is someone attacking our integrity because we haven't responded to one out of many hundreds of comments/threads by 8am the morning after a comment was posted. You know, before the work day has even started. Oh - and when you posted your comment at 10pm last night? I was editing the Fujifilm launch content.

Seriously - and I say this with all due respect, but - get a grip. Exclaiming 'what integrity!' because I haven't personally responded to your post within hours of posting (and minutes of me waking up, as it were) only speaks to your hostility and false assumptions surrounding our intent, dedication, and honesty.

Now, to address your test: I see nothing that disagrees with anything we've written. You have about a 66% hit-rate in your example (5 out of 15 shots aren't perfectly focused). And that's for an example where:

1. The subject was so large as to cover nearly the entire AF grid for most of the sequence. It doesn't matter what AF point the camera used - most covered the subject. That doesn't at all stress subject tracking as our test does. Therefore, I'm not at all surprised that your hit-rate is higher than ours. What else would the camera have focused on when your boat is covering the entire AF area?

2. Which brings us to: 'well, then, at least the camera did keep up with the boat, didn't it, despite significant movement?' I'm glad you asked. The subject isn't changing distance relative to the camera as much as in our test. Why? Two reasons: (1) it's not straight on, there's a good deal of lateral movement, which itself requires no refocusing; and (2) a common misconception is that it's distance moved that matters, when it's actually change in relative distance to the camera that is most difficult, as the greater the change in relative distance, the more the focus element needs to move, and the larger the changes in measured phase difference - which taxes both the lens focus motor as well as the PDAF system. That's why a moving/erratic toddler shot close up at 35/1.4 is often the most challenging AF test (AF acquisition speeds for sports photography notwithstanding).

3. As you've already said, you also have more DOF to work with. Due both to a smaller aperture, as well as an object that is farther away.

Meanwhile, others who've repeated our test with a cyclist, a toddler, or a pet, see similar hit rates to ours, which you can see here, here, and here, and in private messages I obviously can't share.

-Rishi

-- hide signature --

Rishi Sanyal, Ph.D
Deputy Editor, Technical Editor | Digital Photography Review
dpreview.com (work) | rishi.photography (personal)

 Rishi Sanyal's gear list:Rishi Sanyal's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Nikon D810 Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.5 1-5x Macro Nikon 85mm F1.8G Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +3 more
OP MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Re: Posted this 10 hours ago
2

Rishi Sanyal wrote:

MightyMike wrote:

This is interesting, Rishi was active in the forum up to as recently as 5 hours ago, the usual trolls were all over the forum in the last 10 hours and with the massive controversy the subject ignited evidenced by hundreds of posts across at least a half dozen threads I'd have expected this post to get some attention beyond a few supporting comments.

They requested 100% crops, I supplied them, they requested whole images, I supplied them, they requested a long burst of a subject moving in a similar x-y-z nature, I supplied it. I fully explained the methodology, gear used and situation including minor information about the shots before this. I even dropped in my opinions on the focus features and where i believe they should be used and how i believe they should be used.

The question is where are "they" now?

So you posted this around midnight our time last night, and for every one of you there are dozens more making a grand total of hundreds more comments and threads. Furthermore, we actually have jobs here, mine which is actually to evolve DPR testing and technically edit almost everything that goes up on DPR, and you're wondering/suspicious/questioning our integrity because I personally haven't responded to one of the hundreds of comments being made here?

Do you appreciate the chances of me even finding this thread were exceedingly low?

I saw you were active in the forum at that time and i thought you'd have spotted it. I was thinking of sending it to you in a PM but i thought that would be over the top and pushy. Was it midnight where you are?

It appears many of you are completely oblivious to the scale of this operation. Which is, frankly, perplexing - it shouldn't be too hard for you to take a look at the hundreds upon hundreds of comments and forum posts that have piled up, and yet you expect DPR's Technical Editor to personally come in and see it all, despite monitoring forums being <1% of my job description?

I would never have expected you were reviewing many of the comments made. I thought you had an interest in this topic so i figured you'd spot it. Hey I really don't know how big DPR is as a company or much of the inner workings of the company other then supplying an awesome website, great reviews and an excellent community of forums for nuts like us.

Do I have your permission to actually take an evening off and spend it with my wife? How about sleep - do I have your permission to do that? Especially considering I was up until 4 am fielding comments on a review I didn't even write the previous night?

Yes this made me wonder if you were working some kind of night shift, as important as you believe that answers had to be supplied I still feel you'd have been well within your right to go to sleep and answer them later. I also figured after notice your activity and its corresponding time that you'd take the opportunity to sleep in or maybe even a sick day, I'm not sure how flexible your employer is. I don't expect you to answer comments all night and then be ready to answer more as soon as you wake up, I did however figure wrongly you'd have spotted the post and at least acknowledged it. My Mistake.

However the dig wasn't only at you but those pesky trolls who were more than happy to comment on the threads that started all this trouble (yes mine, and that other one) but were completely silent towards this one, perhaps they missed it also.

Maybe i should repeat myself I have nothing against you, assumptions were made you corrected them don't let them fester. Don't look to me for permission to rest, you know you need it so take a break! I too had a couple short nights and long hectic days at work so i feel for you.

Oh its fine to tell a person that their examples in galleries for the public and personal enjoyment are cherry picked and resized and sharpened and there are no sequences and this is wrong and that is wrong and they're at infinity and if the background is at infinity and if i used a canon camera with high quality glass I'd get better images with no regards for consideration of the amount of cropping done or condition during the taking some of those images. that information would be know had they seen the original posting, I suppose I'm part to blame for not linking that information to the post. But still if its that easy to criticize (and it is, I can be put in that group too) then what happened to all the critics?

But when one answers the challenge and does it politely and provides all relevant information and the challengers ignore it, wow what integrity! Perhaps I should have used an outrageous title to get attention.

Maybe we can provide some valid excuses, they might have missed this thread, they might have taken an extensive time downloading the files and are still going through them so haven't had time to comment.

I'm trying very hard not to say they don't care about the truth because I believe they do otherwise why would they argue so hard their opinion just a day ago?

I hope they either just missed this evidence or have been too busy to reply, i really don't want it to be that they are ignoring this example.

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

-- hide signature --

Rishi Sanyal, Ph.D
Deputy Editor, Technical Editor | Digital Photography Review
dpreview.com (work) | rishi.photography (personal)

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

OP MightyMike Forum Pro • Posts: 39,155
Re: Rishi and Everyone, Sorry Not A Cyclist, Large Images
1

Rishi Sanyal wrote:

First of all, thanks for doing this. I like how you've made it easy for us to see the results by compiling crops in addition to providing full-resolution images. That's exactly how it should be done.

Second, calm down, as I've suggested to you below. You are one of hundreds of commenters and thousands of comments that we cannot personally sift through every day, especially when doing so constitutes less than 1% of my job duties/description. In fact, many of us sacrifice our personal time and/or sleep to respond to you. We're human, and the last thing we want to see - when we're sacrificing our own sleep to respond to often petulant comments resulting from not even reading the reviews we work hard on - is someone attacking our integrity because we haven't responded to one out of many hundreds of comments/threads by 8am the morning after a comment was posted. You know, before the work day has even started. Oh - and when you posted your comment at 10pm last night? I was editing the Fujifilm launch content.

Seriously - and I say this with all due respect, but - get a grip. Exclaiming 'what integrity!' because I haven't personally responded to your post within hours of posting (and minutes of me waking up, as it were) only speaks to your hostility and false assumptions surrounding our intent, dedication, and honesty.

I said some stupid things, it happens, I'll try to be more patient in the future, i'm sure you'll see what i wrote to your comments on that matter in your previous posting

Now, to address your test: I see nothing that disagrees with anything we've written. You have about a 66% hit-rate in your example (5 out of 15 shots aren't perfectly focused). And that's for an example where:

1. The subject was so large as to cover nearly the entire AF grid for most of the sequence. It doesn't matter what AF point the camera used - most covered the subject. That doesn't at all stress subject tracking as our test does. Therefore, I'm not at all surprised that your hit-rate is higher than ours. What else would the camera have focused on when your boat is covering the entire AF area?

at 100% i wouldn't call the boat the subject, to be picky most of it is out of focus. In this SEL-33 mode the camera does not use any of the other points to obtain focus until focus lock is achieved, using this mode for a bird in flight sucks. If you can't keep that center point perfectly on the bird it won't lock focus, it will either hunt or choose the clouds near infinity. I'm not sure you have EXIF software that shows the point or points there were active, I certainly don't but when reviewing the photos in the camera it does show this, I haven't bothered to put the photos back on a card to review them in the camera so i can't give you a clear picture of what was happening. Had i used Auto-33 then yes the whole subject could be the boat and so long as any part of that subject was in focus then it was working.

2. Which brings us to: 'well, then, at least the camera did keep up with the boat, didn't it, despite significant movement?' I'm glad you asked. The subject isn't changing distance relative to the camera as much as in our test. Why? Two reasons: (1) it's not straight on, there's a good deal of lateral movement, which itself requires no refocusing; and (2) a common misconception is that it's distance moved that matters, when it's actually change in relative distance to the camera that is most difficult, as the greater the change in relative distance, the more the focus element needs to move, and the larger the changes in measured phase difference - which taxes both the lens focus motor as well as the PDAF system. That's why a moving/erratic toddler shot close up at 35/1.4 is often the most challenging AF test (AF acquisition speeds for sports photography notwithstanding).

I agree about the toddler, however I apologize I never downloaded the reviews original 100% files the question I have if the change in the size of the person head should be enough to determine the amount of subject movement on the z-axis, if the heads start at a similar size and end at a similar size then wouldn't the relative distance to subject and amount of movement be the same? Further away is compensated for by the longer focal length. so what is the difference in relative head size? can someone check this out, It doesn't need to be you Rishi, I'm sure anyone on the forum can show, Maybe i misjudged the relative size of the head but it seemed similar to what i remember.

3. As you've already said, you also have more DOF to work with. Due both to a smaller aperture, as well as an object that is farther away.

I said above further away should have been completely compensated for by the extra focal length. Try to track a toddler with a 500mm lens near its MFD, maybe the other systems can do it but Pentax likely can't. the longer the focal length and the closer the subject the harder it is for AF to track. I won't even try swallows in flight with my Sigma 500mm F4.5 even though it just fine for airshows and other further BIFs and other animals. I probably wouldn't use it for sports either unless i was very far from the action.

Meanwhile, others who've repeated our test with a cyclist, a toddler, or a pet, see similar hit rates to ours, which you can see here, here, and here, and in private messages I obviously can't share.

They're offering worse evidence then you blasted me for when i posted my galleries, mere comments, no proof, no explanation of lens focal length conditions. I don't distrust them I just want more evidence before i call their results valid.

I'm sure in time we'll see a bunch of similar to DPR's tests posted on the forum and i'm sure that we'll have results ranging from DPRs to closer to what i expect. And I'm sure averaged out its probably somewhere in the middle

-Rishi

-- hide signature --

Rishi Sanyal, Ph.D
Deputy Editor, Technical Editor | Digital Photography Review
dpreview.com (work) | rishi.photography (personal)

Just before i hit post i went to the review, the initial head size is identical... assuming no zika virus their head should be similar in size at the same distance in real life. Yours was shot at 200mm, mine at 300mm so my guy was but a mere 50% further away. by the last frame your guys head took up about 1/5th the area of my guys head 44.7% mono-dimensionally 67% taking into account the focal length difference which would suggest my guy was 50% closer at the end of the sequence. My guy in the boat traveled 2.25x further in the same amount of time, started from further away and finished closer.

Unless my assumptions about similar head size are wrong then I actually had more Z-axis movement both relative and exact. The key telling point in this example is the the similar head size thus similar difficulty level

-- hide signature --

Mike from Canada
"I am not a great photographer! God is a great creator! All I do is capture His creation with the tools He has provided me."
'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'
http://www.michaelfastphotography.com/galleries/VP-BDI_3a.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads