LightBug

Lives in United States Orange County, United States
Works as a Engineer
Joined on Sep 17, 2007

Comments

Total: 86, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

GrayW: Hmm... it seems that AF-C on a static tripod with the subject weaving in and out of the focus field isn't a very good test of the K-1 real world AF capabilities.

Rishi, I have to respectfully disagree. Your tests are rather singular, they are not representative of everyday usage. To track eyes, we can put DSLR in CDAF with face detection, to shoot moving subjects, most would pan to follow instead of relying completely on AF tracking. Your own A7Rii review said it wasn't good for tracking long sequence of action despite an outstanding AF system that aced your in-house tests, due to blackout which tracking. You really should give the K-1 to a pro sports shooter and see how it performs in real world situation before you make your AF conclusion solely based on the artificial tests you have.

Link | Posted on Jul 17, 2016 at 03:29 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkhush05: It has been a fair review, Pentax are not known for the best AF in the industry and it comes as no surprise, but some of the wordings of the reviewers are bizarre. Like what excatly does one mean by the AF is a failure? The only failure here is DPR's failure to get the most out of a camera, that while not a blazing fast sports camera, is quite a capable all round shooter. Clearly if someone wants to get action photos with a K1, they certainly can. Will it be as easy as pointing the camera in the direction you want and let it do all the work? of course not! but can you take action shots? definitely, enough Pentaxians have proven that!

Action photography is not only about keeping your camera still and letting the AF chase the subject. With enough practice and skill, people can take better action photos with a far lesser camera. So its unfair to say a camera is not capable of taking action shots at all, not as effortless as other brands, but it can get the job done if used right

Ian, that you are correct, but it's consistent back focus, so I would say it's not the AF module's fault. I had AF fine adjustment set to front-focus +5 originally for that day, and that gave me some sharp photos of my son posing. But doing further micro adjustment while shooting a closeup of a grasshopper changed that to 0, and that seems to be my mistake. Looks like I should have trusted the original +5 AF fine adjustment. Thanks for letting me know, I hope to get even better photos with that combo.

Link | Posted on Jul 12, 2016 at 04:45 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkhush05: It has been a fair review, Pentax are not known for the best AF in the industry and it comes as no surprise, but some of the wordings of the reviewers are bizarre. Like what excatly does one mean by the AF is a failure? The only failure here is DPR's failure to get the most out of a camera, that while not a blazing fast sports camera, is quite a capable all round shooter. Clearly if someone wants to get action photos with a K1, they certainly can. Will it be as easy as pointing the camera in the direction you want and let it do all the work? of course not! but can you take action shots? definitely, enough Pentaxians have proven that!

Action photography is not only about keeping your camera still and letting the AF chase the subject. With enough practice and skill, people can take better action photos with a far lesser camera. So its unfair to say a camera is not capable of taking action shots at all, not as effortless as other brands, but it can get the job done if used right

There is also following paradox:

Pentax K-1 did not meet DPR's expectation in the "bike" AFC test, but many people report that it can do sports/action fairly well.

Sony A7RII aced the bike test, but DPR themselves reported it's not that good for sports/action photography.

What's more important? Being able to use a camera for real or meeting expectation of a singular test. By the way, I do not know what that expectation could be for K-1 in the "bike" test. If DPR shows how D810 performs under same test, maybe we have some valid expectation.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 06:55 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: I went back to LR to look at the the current set of images in DPR's K-1 review, and found out where the center of each frame were (left and right below refers to image's left and right, opposite of cyclist's left and right, in focus means the face is in sharp focus):

IMGP2813: left side of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2814: top left edge of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2815: left side of helmet

IMGP2816: face

IMGP2817: face

IMGP2818: face

IMGP2819: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2820: center of face

IMGP2821: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2822: face (in focus)

IMGP2823: left ear

IMGP2824: left side of face

IMGP2825: left side of face

IMGP2826: left ear

Compared to the AF overlay image, the center autofocus point seems about the same size as the cyclist's face in the first image.

I suspect the starting 3 frames having the focus point on side of helmet may cause some tracking issue.

ET2, Sony A7R II passed the bike test fine, but according to DPR, it can't do sports very well:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-7r-ii/11

Excerpt from above:
In addition to the comparatively repeatable tests shown here, we also subjected the a7R II to some challenging real-world usage, and put the camera in the hands of a professional shooter pitch-side at the Seattle Seahawks. As you might expect, the a7R II performed significantly less well when trying to keep track of faster moving subjects during continuous shooting, and where there was a multitude of visually-similar potential targets.

The reality ... So while the AF performance is formidable, the success of the camera as a whole can be situation-specific, and we wouldn't recommend the a7R II over a traditional DSLR for continuous bursts in sports scenarios.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 06:37 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkhush05: It has been a fair review, Pentax are not known for the best AF in the industry and it comes as no surprise, but some of the wordings of the reviewers are bizarre. Like what excatly does one mean by the AF is a failure? The only failure here is DPR's failure to get the most out of a camera, that while not a blazing fast sports camera, is quite a capable all round shooter. Clearly if someone wants to get action photos with a K1, they certainly can. Will it be as easy as pointing the camera in the direction you want and let it do all the work? of course not! but can you take action shots? definitely, enough Pentaxians have proven that!

Action photography is not only about keeping your camera still and letting the AF chase the subject. With enough practice and skill, people can take better action photos with a far lesser camera. So its unfair to say a camera is not capable of taking action shots at all, not as effortless as other brands, but it can get the job done if used right

Well, Ian, I don't mean tracking my son is the most demanding action photography, I showed it to illustrate that even lowly Pentax K-S2 paired with a decent lens can track children, and the K-1 ought to as well :) I have done some BIF with my K-x, didn't seem too hard if I can pan to follow the bird. Photographing airplanes and cars are much harder, and Barry and Mike seem to have pretty good success photographing airplanes and cars with K-1. So to say some of these common types of action photography can't be done with K-1 seems like a stretch.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 06:14 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

jkhush05: It has been a fair review, Pentax are not known for the best AF in the industry and it comes as no surprise, but some of the wordings of the reviewers are bizarre. Like what excatly does one mean by the AF is a failure? The only failure here is DPR's failure to get the most out of a camera, that while not a blazing fast sports camera, is quite a capable all round shooter. Clearly if someone wants to get action photos with a K1, they certainly can. Will it be as easy as pointing the camera in the direction you want and let it do all the work? of course not! but can you take action shots? definitely, enough Pentaxians have proven that!

Action photography is not only about keeping your camera still and letting the AF chase the subject. With enough practice and skill, people can take better action photos with a far lesser camera. So its unfair to say a camera is not capable of taking action shots at all, not as effortless as other brands, but it can get the job done if used right

Well said.

I have K-S2, and I can track my son on his bike in a straight line, and it was first time out with my Sigma 17-70 F2.8-4:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57995209

I think DPR ought to remove following misleading text from the "Not so good for" section:

Sporting event photography, photographing moving subjects (e.g. children), wildlife photography...

Based on examples given by Pentaxians and myself, I would say K-1 can do everything listed above.

Link | Posted on Jul 11, 2016 at 05:25 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: I went back to LR to look at the the current set of images in DPR's K-1 review, and found out where the center of each frame were (left and right below refers to image's left and right, opposite of cyclist's left and right, in focus means the face is in sharp focus):

IMGP2813: left side of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2814: top left edge of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2815: left side of helmet

IMGP2816: face

IMGP2817: face

IMGP2818: face

IMGP2819: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2820: center of face

IMGP2821: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2822: face (in focus)

IMGP2823: left ear

IMGP2824: left side of face

IMGP2825: left side of face

IMGP2826: left ear

Compared to the AF overlay image, the center autofocus point seems about the same size as the cyclist's face in the first image.

I suspect the starting 3 frames having the focus point on side of helmet may cause some tracking issue.

Rishi, I merely pointed out there is some alignment error in the test's focus, why is that a red herring? You don't think the face is expected to be in focus while you try to aim your focus point at it? The execution of the test seems to have issue causing the focus point to not align with the subject, maybe it's too hard to align focus point to the face exactly. In that case you should focus on something that's easier for the focus point to perfectly align with, zoom into that for illustration. You cannot expect people to buy into the result if the set up or execution is questionable. Also, please also provide D810 samples under same testing condition, I think that would make very interesting comparison.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 07:26 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: I went back to LR to look at the the current set of images in DPR's K-1 review, and found out where the center of each frame were (left and right below refers to image's left and right, opposite of cyclist's left and right, in focus means the face is in sharp focus):

IMGP2813: left side of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2814: top left edge of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2815: left side of helmet

IMGP2816: face

IMGP2817: face

IMGP2818: face

IMGP2819: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2820: center of face

IMGP2821: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2822: face (in focus)

IMGP2823: left ear

IMGP2824: left side of face

IMGP2825: left side of face

IMGP2826: left ear

Compared to the AF overlay image, the center autofocus point seems about the same size as the cyclist's face in the first image.

I suspect the starting 3 frames having the focus point on side of helmet may cause some tracking issue.

If you do not keep the face under the focus point, do you still expect the face to be in focus? Note half of the focus point could be to the outside of the helmet for the first three shots. Even if there is any predictive algorithm in place, how can that work without the subject (face) being under the focus point?

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 05:48 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)

I went back to LR to look at the the current set of images in DPR's K-1 review, and found out where the center of each frame were (left and right below refers to image's left and right, opposite of cyclist's left and right, in focus means the face is in sharp focus):

IMGP2813: left side of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2814: top left edge of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2815: left side of helmet

IMGP2816: face

IMGP2817: face

IMGP2818: face

IMGP2819: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2820: center of face

IMGP2821: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2822: face (in focus)

IMGP2823: left ear

IMGP2824: left side of face

IMGP2825: left side of face

IMGP2826: left ear

Compared to the AF overlay image, the center autofocus point seems about the same size as the cyclist's face in the first image.

I suspect the starting 3 frames having the focus point on side of helmet may cause some tracking issue.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 04:44 UTC as 150th comment | 19 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

asp1880: This AF-C discussion ought to be winding down by now. So perhaps I shouldn't be posting this then...
Anyway - two things:
1. I trust the DPR AF-C test. Its results on the Pentax cameras mirror my own experiences very well. My own K-3 also usually adjusts the focus only every second or third exposure in an AF-C burst. And I've shot a good amount of competitive bike racing with it.
2. The Pentax system is actually capable of shooting AF-C sequences where it adjusts the focus for every shot, even at closer range. I've seen this a number of times. But it's rare.

Regards,
--Anders.

Asp1880, what are your AFC settings, such as AF Hold?

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 22:00 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)

DPR staff, can you please provide straight-line AFC with PDAF single-point test shots for Nikon D810 as comparison to K-1?

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 20:16 UTC as 167th comment
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: If to compare K-1's AF with Nikon D5/D500 and Canon 1Dx - it's really worse
But is there any sense in such comparison? No.

Nikon 810 is very close to K-1's AF - it depends on lenses, of course.
Some of Pentaxians have the both cameras and found K-1+85/1.4 is even better than D810+85/1.4G.

Rishi, I see only 2 pics out of 14 that were in focus in original AFC test where the focus point was not the cyclist's head, while the new test with focus point on cyclist head has 5 pics out of 14 in focus. Which 4 in original test did you think had good focus? Maybe you are more forgiving than me at judging focus, we can use your criteria and recount. I doubt many would seriously expect test 1 to be successful keeping cyclist head in focus if it's not even the focus point.

Anyone interested can take a look at my post and check if I didn't judge focus correctly:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58025530

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 07:28 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: If to compare K-1's AF with Nikon D5/D500 and Canon 1Dx - it's really worse
But is there any sense in such comparison? No.

Nikon 810 is very close to K-1's AF - it depends on lenses, of course.
Some of Pentaxians have the both cameras and found K-1+85/1.4 is even better than D810+85/1.4G.

Rishi,

Since you so boldly proclaimed the AF performance for the D810, A7RII, can you please show us proof of doing the same test you stressed K-1 with, with similar 200mm F2.8 focal length/aperture, under similar lighting conditions, with these "superior" cameras? At least we will know how much better the other cameras are, instead of going by some empty words?

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 05:37 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

Al wants a bagel: I think people are still angry after the debacle that was the pixel shift test. And I don't know why pixel shift is a con in the first place. That's like saying all Fuji cameras are bad because raw developers for X-Trans are still wildly inconsistent, and in some cases, not supported. And it's uses are limited, that is clear, but isn't that something that should be a plus? That they offer pixel shift should be a bonus, not derided as a feature that cannot be used in some cases.

Deriding the menu system and AF points selection? That is awfully subjective. I've found that over time, those have become second nature, and with so many features available at the press of an actual button, easily I find this camera to be more user friendly compared to my D750. And yes, there are many useful features in this camera not available on the D750. Like the outdoor view button, that button has become invaluable for outdoor shooting in my experience. So is having a dedicated GPS and WIFI button also.

Simon, by not putting a PRO for pixel shift for when it's useful, such as food, product, macro photography, you actually did a disservice to people who could have benefitted from the boost in image quality from pixel shift.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 02:35 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: Rishi, can you please answer my questions below regarding your straight line AFC test?

1. How far was the cyclist away from the camera when the sequence starts? DOF with 200mm F2.8 is quite shallow, depending on distance, so your claim that focus point being on the shirt infers the face should be in focus may not hold if the distance is too short, and especially when cyclist gets nearer.

2. You claim focus point was on the cyclist's shirt, which is off-center towards the upper focus points, yet EXIF shows the focus point was the center one, was there an error in your focus point set up? If indeed the focus point was not even on the shirt, one can certainly expect the face would not be in focus.

Chris, I would say the results look much better with focus point on cyclist's face compared to the sequence that was up before. Would DPR be able to do the same test with Nikon D810 as a peer comparison?

Thanks for your efforts in obliging our requests.

Joey

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 20:57 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)

Rishi, can you please answer my questions below regarding your straight line AFC test?

1. How far was the cyclist away from the camera when the sequence starts? DOF with 200mm F2.8 is quite shallow, depending on distance, so your claim that focus point being on the shirt infers the face should be in focus may not hold if the distance is too short, and especially when cyclist gets nearer.

2. You claim focus point was on the cyclist's shirt, which is off-center towards the upper focus points, yet EXIF shows the focus point was the center one, was there an error in your focus point set up? If indeed the focus point was not even on the shirt, one can certainly expect the face would not be in focus.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 20:10 UTC as 216th comment | 13 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)

Several people have confirmed based on EXIF info, center single focus point was used in the AFC test:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58023225

Maybe some mistake in setting up the camera for the test?
Some correction options probably should have been turned off as well to increase performance.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 18:12 UTC as 220th comment
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

dprived prev: this bit in the Cons section sounds a little bit unfair imo:

"Limited uses for Pixel Shift Resolution shooting modes (static environments)"

or is there another camera that does the same thing (such as Olympus?) and does it better and in an "unlimited" way?

Chris, how about listing AF-C as a Con for every camera for landscape shooters? Seems like bias if you don't list pixel shift as a Pro for product photography, macros, and still life, but instead list is as a Con for something it's not designed for.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 17:52 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: KKsniper analyzed how DPR's AF tracking test may have some issues, such as failing to keep focus points on the subjects head:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58016586

Rishi, EXIF says focus point was "center" (17) out of 33 possible values, could there have been a mistake that the dead center auto focus point was used instead of the one above?

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 07:17 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2652 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: KKsniper analyzed how DPR's AF tracking test may have some issues, such as failing to keep focus points on the subjects head:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58016586

What puzzles me is if center, single focus point is used, as indicated by EXIF, that seems not to be the location of the jersey, but focus is actually on the cyclist's black shorts or the bike's handlebar.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 06:39 UTC
Total: 86, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »