Warning, why not jumping to Pentax anymore

[stevo23]

Speaking of the K1 image files - I noticed that the pixel shift ones are terrible - lot's of pixelated artefacts wherever there's movement. Perhaps you need something special to deal with it. Did you find anything out about that in general?

From what I understand you have to use special software for that, like silkypix or something. That's how it works.

Interesting - I was looking at the DPR samples, so apparently they would have used that. Still, the results are not so great. But heck, you don't need that feature to see stunning images.

 

[Batdude]

I had a very very interesting day today and maybe this info might be helpful to some.

I went to a store to go try the K1 with 24-70 lens. I started my AF "test" in the store and the camera/lens would not lock on focus on any of the people that were there that were walking/passing by me. The AF is so poor that the camera simply would not lock focus on the subject.

I wouldn't expect it not to lock focus on anyone. I assume the camera was TRYING to focus? Just to rule out,

you're sure the lens wasn't set to MF?

or the shutter AF was disabled (set for back-button AF)?

otherwise very curious, the K-1 doesn't have the greatest AF performance, but it's not that bad, or maybe it is - in a camera store refusing to focus on people walking up to the Nikon and Canon counters!

Movement though, can disrupt AF locking, not only low light, but the subject shifting under the AF point. Undoubtably the K-1's biggest strength is product and landscape photography - in that AF is fine, and that's also when you'd be using the camera's pixel-shift feature.

I read from your posts on the Pentax forum...

"I shoot dancing events and people are dancing/moving right in front of me. Half the time this people turn the lights off and they only leave a few rinky dinky ugly colorful spot lights on, and then I would do my thing."

...the K-1 isn't for you, even the Fuji's may struggle in those conditions. You need Nikon or Canon if you want best AF performance for action.

As long as the room is not dark, even the XT1 can lock on focus and will get the green box, the pentax doesn't light up the AF point at all and is a no go. I think even the XE1 AF is a bit better.

And the issue is not just with that lens but it looks like pentax has poor AF in general.

I came back and opened a thread with the results and I stated my clear disappointment, and some posters started saying that they too have problems with AF and is a very well known issue. Of course before I was asking about the system because I said that I was "in love" with the IQ everybody was all cool as usual, but after I came back to discuss the trouble I had at the store with the AF some were not happy at all and of course my post gets deleted. classic.

The K1 IQ is incredibly beautiful, it really is, but the AF is completely useless to me. Is really embarrassing because I think my XE1 can lock on focus on moving subjects indoor, in this case, something so simple as someone walking by you in a store with the available light, and I'm talking about AF-S, not AF-C.

Anyway, just in case anyone is interested in a K1 or all their cameras in general, I suggest you make sure your application matches the system's abilities. But, for pure still photography the K1 RAW/DNG files are DROP DEAD GORGEOUS and I'm very sad that I'm not going to be able to get this camera. So I'll continue shooting with what I currently have.

Thanks.

 

[yardcoyote]

Absolutely-- shooting dancers in low light is like shooting indoor sports.(Pretty much exactly like, I would imagine, and that's supposed to be the hardest kind of shooting there is.) You need the best dedicated action gear you can afford, not a slower paced "artist's camera".

My Pentax K-5IIS, many years off the state of the art even for Pentax in all areas, including AF, suits me down to the ground, as do those of my Fuji lenses that are often described as having "poor AF". That's because my photographic interests (in walkaround, garden macro, casual portraiture of people, animals, and things, etc.) don't require lightning fast AF. I might enjoy having it, but don't need it, I don't miss it, and I don't want to pay for it, especially at the cost of the qualities I do want in a camera and lenses.

If you know what you need (which sounds like a sports camera to me), then you should go out and look for that.

 

[Easy Rider]

Is that true about the sales reps?

I ask as I gave a very positive review of my Nikon D5300 in the Nikon DX forum, only stating the simple actual fact that it is slightly let down by a lack of DX primes and for WA you have to buy £600 pound lenses or resort to zooms.

Man did I get a roasting, and the rest of the review was glowing (a fab camera, amazing bang for buck etc.)

Then there's a guy in the Nikon DX forum again and is wanting something to replace his D5100 for SOCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY, he explicitly said social photography.

He has a WA zoom, 35mm F1.8 Prime and an 85mm F1.8 Prime.

So everyone chimes in how he needs an D7200 or D7500. For social photography, and to use those massive lenses with.

I chime in and point out that all sensor scores and tests between his D5100 and the D7XXX cameras are almost the same and the difference in IQ performance with the same lenses that he owns on all three bodies is minimal, literally minimal and the low light difference is less than half a stop...

So I suggest he keeps his D5100 and lenses for travel, portraits, landscape etc and gets a Ricoh GR or Fuji X100T or F for his new social camera, seeing as there's no real upgrade between a D5100 and a D7200 / D7500 other than features he does not need such as better VF, weather sealing, faster FPS and buffer.

So he might as well save a lot of cash, keep his camera that with those lenses will take THE SAME PHOTOS as the D7XXX cameras (he is not into sports or wildlife) and then have a second camera like the GR / X100T for social shooting. I even go to camerasize.com and post some links showing him the massive size difference etc as well as all the DXOMARK scores etc.

All in all, pretty good outside the box thinking advice no?

Boy did some hounds come out for blood! I actually thought to myself 'these must be Nikon sales reps!' But then thought, 'no that's silly and paranoid.'

Apparently they well could be? Because they do not have this guy's interest at heart as keeping his D5100 and buying a separate pocket rocket type camera for social shooting is much better advice than trading in his D5100 for a massive D7XXX.

And boy do they never give up, no logic to there arguments and persuasions, just buy the latest Nikon, buy the latest Nikon.

By the way I love Nikon and always state as much but still they come out with the claws if you don't agree...

 

[Vic Chapman]

That's a well known issue of most forums Im afraid. Its the same when we try to discuss the shortcomings of Fuji as well. People get so defensive its impossible to have a normal discussion.

The only one that looses are ourselves. If we dont voice the negatives the companies won't know to fix them.

With your long history of membership here - 2 months - you must be easily able to state one single case where our very fair-minded (too fair-minded or you would be deleted) moderators have deleted a thread because it criticised Fuji products.

I await your response with interest.

If not, then you owe them an apology.

Vic

 

[CAcreeks]

I went to a store to go try the K1 with 24-70 lens. I started my AF "test" in the store and the camera/lens would not lock on focus on any of the people that were there that were walking/passing by me. The AF is so poor that the camera simply would not lock focus on the subject

Is this a lens issue with the 24-70, or a failure to update firmware?

The only reason I ask is that the imaging-resource.com review says:

"Fast autofocus with great low-light capabilities"

 

[gipas]

I had a very very interesting day today and maybe this info might be helpful to some.

I went to a store to go try the K1 with 24-70 lens. I started my AF "test" in the store and the camera/lens would not lock on focus on any of the people that were there that were walking/passing by me. The AF is so poor that the camera simply would not lock focus on the subject. And the issue is not just with that lens but it looks like pentax has poor AF in general.

I came back and opened a thread with the results and I stated my clear disappointment, and some posters started saying that they too have problems with AF and is a very well known issue. Of course before I was asking about the system because I said that I was "in love" with the IQ everybody was all cool as usual, but after I came back to discuss the trouble I had at the store with the AF some were not happy at all and of course my post gets deleted. classic.

The K1 IQ is incredibly beautiful, it really is, but the AF is completely useless to me. Is really embarrassing because I think my XE1 can lock on focus on moving subjects indoor, in this case, something so simple as someone walking by you in a store with the available light, and I'm talking about AF-S, not AF-C.

Anyway, just in case anyone is interested in a K1 or all their cameras in general, I suggest you make sure your application matches the system's abilities. But, for pure still photography the K1 RAW/DNG files are DROP DEAD GORGEOUS and I'm very sad that I'm not going to be able to get this camera. So I'll continue shooting with what I currently have.

Thanks.

Hello Batdude,

are you sure the K1 you have tried was setup correctly? I own both a K3 and the X-E1 and I'm pretty sure that the K3 beats the X-E1 in every possible way and conditions when talking about AF. The k3 is able to lock the focus down to -3 EV more so the K1 and I really doubt that the X-E1 can do better. If you have had such a bad experience tan most likely something were wrong. I repeat the K3 is miles ahead to the X-E1 when talking about AFs and AFC ( I'm just back from a Safari trip during which I've shoot in every possible light condition and the K3 performed admirably well) given that the K1 is at least as good as the K3 I feel reasonably safe in saying that the K1 is much better than the X-E1. I suggest to try another K1.

By the way, I love X-E1 despite its subpar AF.

Cheers.

 

[Lobbamobba]

All I know is that my girlfriend once worked for a company hired by Nikon to "attend" forums. But they where in no way moderators or trying to silence people. It was more to give answers and collect data.

 

[fft2000]

Speaking of the K1 image files - I noticed that the pixel shift ones are terrible - lot's of pixelated artefacts wherever there's movement. Perhaps you need something special to deal with it. Did you find anything out about that in general?

From what I understand you have to use special software for that, like silkypix or something. That's how it works.

Interesting - I was looking at the DPR samples, so apparently they would have used that. Still, the results are not so great. But heck, you don't need that feature to see stunning images.

The big plus with pixel shift is that it stores 4 separate frames in each raw file - Olympus already does in-camera processing and merges the frames so you are stuck with the in-camera-merge-algorithm. With Pentax you are free to just use one frame. And when software gets better you can re-process the files to get better results.

I just yesterday played with RawTherapees Pentax Pixel Shift support on a downloaded file - I couldn't find artefacts. The result is better but not by much than just a single frame, especially noise-wise and fine detail there are differences, can't tell about colors as I am red-green-blind, but it SHOULD have correct colors.

 

[Lobbamobba]

Yeah because its not like Ive attended other forums in the past or anything.

And we all know its impossible to read this forum if not a member.

And we all know that lurking is punishable by death

But ok I will give you an example. This thread. You
My guess though is that given how defensive and denying you got just by my post you will ask for another example.
So, browse my post history and you will quickly find one about the X100f's build quality.
You can also check the thread about why one shoots digital where I simply pointed out that Sony doesn't report profits from mirrorless interchangeable lens still cameras, but instead bundle the numbers with other segments before being able to report profit.
Boy was people mad.

Any who, Im not sure why you where upset, I mean that was the whole point of my post.
If we don't discuss negatives of cameras, companies can't fix them. And if we don't discuss negatives of forums.... well I think you know where Im going.

So no apology needed, have a nice day.

 

[Easy Rider]

Oh I'm not suggesting the mods are in anyway corrupt, they are very light handed here.

But I used to be a salesman myself (and a very good one) and I just did a thought experiment and in fact not only would I want people from my company on one of the most popular forums discussing my products doing this, I would actually probably hire some to write seemingly newbie questions and create debate about the most popular and searched for of my products online, in order to bring up more search results when people buying their first camera especially (pros likely do not need to do the same kind of searching...) was researching whether or not to buy my products.

Cynical but true, so if even I can think this up, I'm sure 'smarterer' people than me have ha ha....

 

[Midwest]

I had a very very interesting day today and maybe this info might be helpful to some.

I went to a store to go try the K1 with 24-70 lens. I started my AF "test" in the store and the camera/lens would not lock on focus on any of the people that were there that were walking/passing by me. The AF is so poor that the camera simply would not lock focus on the subject. And the issue is not just with that lens but it looks like pentax has poor AF in general.

With Pentax you get IBIS. With IBIS you get a big advantage, the ability to use any lens 'stabilized'. You also get disadvantages. The OVF and the AF sensors both get an unstabilized view because (as far as I know, I could be wrong) you would be using unstabilized lenses on a Pentax. Tiresome for the user especially at longer tele distances with nonstop viewfinder jitter, and harder for the AF to track and attain focus as it also doesn't have a stable view of the image to work with.

If someone wants to use old lenses and a tripod, hey, it's really a very fine camera. I like the IQ I've seen from many posted shots. I've saved a few off to my PC I liked them so much. But, if someone wants to do something where AF (especially tracked AF) is important, or if they want to shoot at any kind of distance, the lack of OIS is a drawback.

I came back and opened a thread with the results and I stated my clear disappointment, and some posters started saying that they too have problems with AF and is a very well known issue. Of course before I was asking about the system because I said that I was "in love" with the IQ everybody was all cool as usual, but after I came back to discuss the trouble I had at the store with the AF some were not happy at all and of course my post gets deleted. classic.

The K1 IQ is incredibly beautiful, it really is, but the AF is completely useless to me. Is really embarrassing because I think my XE1 can lock on focus on moving subjects indoor, in this case, something so simple as someone walking by you in a store with the available light, and I'm talking about AF-S, not AF-C.

Anyway, just in case anyone is interested in a K1 or all their cameras in general, I suggest you make sure your application matches the system's abilities. But, for pure still photography the K1 RAW/DNG files are DROP DEAD GORGEOUS and I'm very sad that I'm not going to be able to get this camera. So I'll continue shooting with what I currently have.

I have nothing against Pentax, though some might think I do. It's just that on a DSLR, stabilizing nothing BUT the sensor puts some other functionality at a disadvantage. It's up to the user to decide whether the Pentax approach will suit their type of shooting. Still, model after model come out and the AF never seems to get significantly better, and I believe their use of IBIS instead of OIS is why.

 

[left eye]

I had a very very interesting day today and maybe this info might be helpful to some.

I went to a store to go try the K1 with 24-70 lens. I started my AF "test" in the store and the camera/lens would not lock on focus on any of the people that were there that were walking/passing by me. The AF is so poor that the camera simply would not lock focus on the subject.

I wouldn't expect it not to lock focus on anyone. I assume the camera was TRYING to focus? Just to rule out,

you're sure the lens wasn't set to MF?

or the shutter AF was disabled (set for back-button AF)?

otherwise very curious, the K-1 doesn't have the greatest AF performance, but it's not that bad, or maybe it is - in a camera store refusing to focus on people walking up to the Nikon and Canon counters!

Movement though, can disrupt AF locking, not only low light, but the subject shifting under the AF point. Undoubtably the K-1's biggest strength is product and landscape photography - in that AF is fine, and that's also when you'd be using the camera's pixel-shift feature.

I read from your posts on the Pentax forum...

"I shoot dancing events and people are dancing/moving right in front of me. Half the time this people turn the lights off and they only leave a few rinky dinky ugly colorful spot lights on, and then I would do my thing."

...the K-1 isn't for you, even the Fuji's may struggle in those conditions. You need Nikon or Canon if you want best AF performance for action.

As long as the room is not dark, even the XT1 can lock on focus and will get the green box, the pentax doesn't light up the AF point at all and is a no go.

I trust the shops demo K-1 didn't have it's AF overlay disabled?

see...

I think even the XE1 AF is a bit better.

And the issue is not just with that lens but it looks like pentax has poor AF in general.

I came back and opened a thread with the results and I stated my clear disappointment, and some posters started saying that they too have problems with AF and is a very well known issue. Of course before I was asking about the system because I said that I was "in love" with the IQ everybody was all cool as usual, but after I came back to discuss the trouble I had at the store with the AF some were not happy at all and of course my post gets deleted. classic.

The K1 IQ is incredibly beautiful, it really is, but the AF is completely useless to me. Is really embarrassing because I think my XE1 can lock on focus on moving subjects indoor, in this case, something so simple as someone walking by you in a store with the available light, and I'm talking about AF-S, not AF-C.

Anyway, just in case anyone is interested in a K1 or all their cameras in general, I suggest you make sure your application matches the system's abilities. But, for pure still photography the K1 RAW/DNG files are DROP DEAD GORGEOUS and I'm very sad that I'm not going to be able to get this camera. So I'll continue shooting with what I currently have.

Thanks.

 

[grazuncle]

I have a friend who owns a K1 and he used it on a recent wedding and complained about the autofocus, especially during the low light moments of the day. He does use it for landscapes and they turn out incredible, but that's a whole different area of photography.

One of the sales ladies from the samy's camera where I was told me that her friend sold his sony mirrorless FF and got the K1 and he LOOOOOVES it and she has seen his images, but he only uses it for portraits. That's it. And yes, from what I experienced as long as your subject is not moving so much the camera does focus well.

If I had the money and luxury to buy this camera just for fun, I would, because the images are pretty damn gorgeous. That's the part that doesn't add up with this camera. Hopefully Ricoh will fix this with the next model because I still want one.

I hope so too.. However the AF of the Pentax range have a reputation of being unreliable and more importantly randomly so. This has been the case for years. even in their film days.

However it is not to say a Pentax camera cannot be lived with, worked around or impossible to focus. That would be ridiculous. They would not sell any if that were the case.

They do however pack an awful lot of useful stuff into their cameras! if action is not your specific need you could do a lot worse. Depends where your compromises lie.. Fuji fit mine very well.

 

[Iuvenis]

I had a Pentax and I thought the AF was fine. However, I'd just come from using a Leica M6 and I didn't actually know what C-AF was. I certainly didn't use it for the 2 years or so I used the camera. When I first tried it out on the X-E2, I thought it was some kind of black magic (though it was reassuringly hit and miss!)

 

[stevo23]

Speaking of the K1 image files - I noticed that the pixel shift ones are terrible - lot's of pixelated artefacts wherever there's movement. Perhaps you need something special to deal with it. Did you find anything out about that in general?

From what I understand you have to use special software for that, like silkypix or something. That's how it works.

Interesting - I was looking at the DPR samples, so apparently they would have used that. Still, the results are not so great. But heck, you don't need that feature to see stunning images.

The big plus with pixel shift is that it stores 4 separate frames in each raw file - Olympus already does in-camera processing and merges the frames so you are stuck with the in-camera-merge-algorithm. With Pentax you are free to just use one frame. And when software gets better you can re-process the files to get better results.

I just yesterday played with RawTherapees Pentax Pixel Shift support on a downloaded file - I couldn't find artefacts. The result is better but not by much than just a single frame, especially noise-wise and fine detail there are differences, can't tell about colors as I am red-green-blind, but it SHOULD have correct colors.

Interesting and good information. Thanks.

 

[Vic Chapman]

Yeah because its not like Ive attended other forums in the past or anything.

And we all know its impossible to read this forum if not a member.

And we all know that lurking is punishable by death

But ok I will give you an example. This thread. You
My guess though is that given how defensive and denying you got just by my post you will ask for another example.
So, browse my post history and you will quickly find one about the X100f's build quality.
You can also check the thread about why one shoots digital where I simply pointed out that Sony doesn't report profits from mirrorless interchangeable lens still cameras, but instead bundle the numbers with other segments before being able to report profit.
Boy was people mad.

Any who, Im not sure why you where upset, I mean that was the whole point of my post.
If we don't discuss negatives of cameras, companies can't fix them. And if we don't discuss negatives of forums.... well I think you know where Im going.

So no apology needed, have a nice day.

Don't try to fudge the issue. I'm not talking about members being defensive on this or any forum nor even about your being upset because they don't blindly accept your opinion.

This is completely unrelated to any camera stuff. I'm talking about your unfounded slur on two hard working and very fair minded moderators on this forum. You accuse them of deleting posts because they were critical of Fuji equipment - quite simply - where are these posts you say they have deleted?

Perhaps you should not judge others by your own low standards of behaviour.

Vic

 

[Jerry-astro]

Yeah because its not like Ive attended other forums in the past or anything.

And we all know its impossible to read this forum if not a member.

And we all know that lurking is punishable by death

But ok I will give you an example. This thread. You
My guess though is that given how defensive and denying you got just by my post you will ask for another example.
So, browse my post history and you will quickly find one about the X100f's build quality.
You can also check the thread about why one shoots digital where I simply pointed out that Sony doesn't report profits from mirrorless interchangeable lens still cameras, but instead bundle the numbers with other segments before being able to report profit.
Boy was people mad.

Any who, Im not sure why you where upset, I mean that was the whole point of my post.
If we don't discuss negatives of cameras, companies can't fix them. And if we don't discuss negatives of forums.... well I think you know where Im going.

So no apology needed, have a nice day.

Don't try to fudge the issue. I'm not talking about members being defensive on this or any forum nor even about your being upset because they don't blindly accept your opinion.

This is completely unrelated to any camera stuff. I'm talking about your unfounded slur on two hard working and very fair minded moderators on this forum. You accuse them of deleting posts because they were critical of Fuji equipment - quite simply - where are these posts you say they have deleted?

Perhaps you should not judge others by your own low standards of behaviour.

Vic

Vic, I truly appreciate the positive comments... thank you.

Meanwhile, guys, let's move on to something else. Let me quote directly from DPR's forum rules:

1. Posts discussing moderator actions are not allowed and will be deleted.

So, let's shift the conversation back to the topic and away from the terrible job that Bob I do, since we both have very sensitive sensibilities and hate any form of criticism. Or, perhaps simply consider the quoted rule above. Take your choice, but let's get back to Batdude's Pentax Adventure, OK?

--
Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

 

[stevo23]

Yeah because its not like Ive attended other forums in the past or anything.

And we all know its impossible to read this forum if not a member.

And we all know that lurking is punishable by death

But ok I will give you an example. This thread. You
My guess though is that given how defensive and denying you got just by my post you will ask for another example.
So, browse my post history and you will quickly find one about the X100f's build quality.
You can also check the thread about why one shoots digital where I simply pointed out that Sony doesn't report profits from mirrorless interchangeable lens still cameras, but instead bundle the numbers with other segments before being able to report profit.
Boy was people mad.

Any who, Im not sure why you where upset, I mean that was the whole point of my post.
If we don't discuss negatives of cameras, companies can't fix them. And if we don't discuss negatives of forums.... well I think you know where Im going.

So no apology needed, have a nice day.

Don't try to fudge the issue. I'm not talking about members being defensive on this or any forum nor even about your being upset because they don't blindly accept your opinion.

This is completely unrelated to any camera stuff. I'm talking about your unfounded slur on two hard working and very fair minded moderators on this forum. You accuse them of deleting posts because they were critical of Fuji equipment - quite simply - where are these posts you say they have deleted?

Perhaps you should not judge others by your own low standards of behaviour.

Vic

Vic, I truly appreciate the positive comments... thank you.

Meanwhile, guys, let's move on to something else. Let me quote directly from DPR's forum rules:

1. Posts discussing moderator actions are not allowed and will be deleted.

So, let's shift the conversation back to the topic and away from the terrible job that Bob I do, since we both have very sensitive sensibilities and hate any form of criticism. Or, perhaps simply consider the quoted rule above. Take your choice, but let's get back to Batdude's Pentax Adventure, OK?

You mean, "I came here for an argument"..."Oh I'm sorry, this is abuse, you want 12A":

 

[Jerry-astro]

You mean, "I came here for an argument"..."Oh I'm sorry, this is abuse, you want 12A":

OMG, wiping the tears of laughter after watching that sketch for the first time in more years than I'd like to admit. Well played.