Please help me think through a possible system change. (cross post) Thanks!

Thank you, I appreciate you sharing your experience. I do definitely value connecting with a camera. I think it makes you a better photographer when you love the tool you are using. I find Fujifilm very interesting, but I'm done with APS-C. My K20D can handle any APS-C shooting I want do, and the fuji medium format are in general more expensive and not suited to what I want to do from what I can see of them.

You know, I tried out the 77 limited and I actually don't care for it. I find it hunts for focus a lot, is loud, and slow as well as hunting. I was surprised by that because it is a much beloved lens. However, I honestly like my SDM 50MM 1.4 much better. It's smoother, stops down lower, doesn't hunt nearly as much, and I like the photos I get out of it better so far. I thought I got a bad copy of the 77 so I exchanged it and have found it to be the same. Now, I've only worked with it indoors so far, so I have to give it a fair shake outside in better light, but for my purposes I just love that 50mm 1.4

I really want to try the 85mm. That's the lens I lust for the most.

What body did you try the FA77 on? I use back-button AF with my K-1, focus and recompose, and this lens is solid for me. I calibrated it of course, and it needed a -4 adjustment (as did most of my primes), and now the accuracy is spot-on. With a stationary subject I sometimes use live-view with focus peaking, which is very accurate as well. With AF set to shutter release, I find that the K-1 tends to hunt a lot, so that might be the issue for you. Fortunately, I've always preferred back-button AF, so it works for me. YMMV.

yoyoma007 wrote:

Am I going to irritate clients off when I keep having to retake shots of their kids because the k1 won't focus well enough? That's probably my biggest concern.

That's the thing with current Pentax bodies. The K-3III is the only Pentax body that has somewhat of a semi-reliable AF system to take portraits of moving kids & pets, but it's still nothing close to what Sony & Canon offer. The latest AF systems in their newer bodies can really track people & pets quite well. They're not 100% accurate all the time, but they're a lot better at getting focused shots of kids fidgeting around & related. The Nikon Z bodies seem to struggle at times with people photos. The Z9 is the best one for people photos, but it's quite pricey. Maybe the future Z6III & Z7III will do a lot better.

I'm guessing that the K-1III will more than likely improve upon that eye-af/face recognition through the OVF that's in the K-3III, but until Ricoh releases the body or specs, we won't know. They also need to release more faster focusing modern lenses as well. Screw drives can only do so much.

yoyoma007 wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

yoyoma007 wrote:

It's not that I crop so much. That's a nice advantage, but I tend to take my time and compose so that I do very little cropping.

That statement contrasts for me to the need for state-of-the-art AF, which I tend to see as a more 'run-and-gun' requirement. Sounds like you might be doing different types of photography? For example, slow, possibly manually tweaked focus for portraiture, but needing near instant AF for sports or wedding/party candids. Multiple conflicting requirements aren't unusual, but you need to think about what proportions are so you can be comfortable with where to accept any necessary compromises.

I wouldn't mind buying new lenses, like the amazing Pentax HD 85mm because I love portraiture, but I just have no idea what Pentax has in mind for the future.

Speaking now as a retired software developer: nothing is a worse mistake than buying the future (aka vaporware). Assume any system you would buy will be off-the-market in a year. The only thing that can matter is what's currently on the shelf; the rest is expensive speculation.

Thanks, that's a good way to look at it. It's easy to fall into the same future trap with tech of any kind. I've found myself doing the same thing with PC hardware as well at times.

As to the auto-focus question, the concern for me is mainly missing kids or pets etc. in portraiture. Potentially causing unnecessary frustration. Perhaps I'm over thinking that? As is likely obvious at this point in the conversation, I do tend to overthink everything and can get a little paralyzed about decisions. I'm very detail oriented and like to be very informed, but those traits can get a little out of control.

At this time the auto-focus doesn't matter much for sports. I sometimes shoot my kids soccer games (little kids) but that's not something I'm looking to do professionally, just for fun sometimes. I also don't shoot birds. When I shoot nature, it's most likely landscapes, flowers, sometimes macro of insects.

As onerous as this conversation may have become for those responding, I still really appreciate the feedback. It helps me clear my head a bit, and now I'm wondering if I've just worried too much about auto focus. It's easy to get caught up in that mirror-less hype, because it seems to be what every review harps on.

Maybe it's because I came from film, but I remain pretty happy with even the most basic AF. And I'm a klutz. But I can still get lots of action just by using the same tricks as then, like having a wide DOF. I do wish my Pentax had that neat scale like the GRs for zone focusing; it's another way to nail it with C-AF.

And Pentax has catch in focus. Even some of the other high zoot cameras don't have that. I use it for action, for catching an animal when it moves into a spot. And I use it for macros where the slightest movement throws focus off. So even though I have an R6, sometimes to get proper focus I prefer my K-1ii.

And Pentax even has an AF adapter for non-AF lenses. It's basically a 1.7 TC with the ability to use AF on say a 200mm Pentax manual lens. I don't think I can do that with any other current camera.