K30 Review - AF a smidge worse than Canon 5d II
Posted 10/07/2012 - 13:17
Link
Yes, posted that on the preview thread. Generally very favourable I thought. I wasn't totally clear what he was saying about the AF.
Seem to be a few hands on reviews coming out now. I wonder who will be the first on here to have one
Seem to be a few hands on reviews coming out now. I wonder who will be the first on here to have one
Posted 10/07/2012 - 13:43
Link
"So why do I need to use the outer focusing points to begin with? Why couldn’t I focus and recompose? Because then I’d throw of the plane of focus. It would be nice of Pentax utilized something like Hasslebald’s TruFocus system that was designed for those types of photographers."
From the review. Anyone care to explain this to me please, in particular the '..plane of focus.' thing.
From the review. Anyone care to explain this to me please, in particular the '..plane of focus.' thing.
Posted 10/07/2012 - 13:58
Link
They are saying that if you use the centre point only and then move the camera, say, downwards to recompose, the distance from the point the eye registers on the sensor to has changed, slightly altering the focus point.
I'm not totally convinced that at normal distances and apertures this makes very much difference. At macro distances and very wide apertures it may well do.
I'm not totally convinced that at normal distances and apertures this makes very much difference. At macro distances and very wide apertures it may well do.
Best regards, John
Posted 10/07/2012 - 14:16
Link
This is a £650 camera. They are expecting too much by comparing with a Hasselblad. Or are they? Maybe the Canikon models up to £5000 are not in the same league as the K30 !!!.
Whatever will they ever compare the K3 with?
Patty
Whatever will they ever compare the K3 with?
Patty
Posted 10/07/2012 - 15:39
Link
johnriley wrote:
They are saying that if you use the centre point only and then move the camera, say, downwards to recompose, the distance from the point the eye registers on the sensor to has changed, slightly altering the focus point.
I'm not totally convinced that at normal distances and apertures this makes very much difference. At macro distances and very wide apertures it may well do.
Thanks John. Still don't get it. If I stand and focus on a person's eye, then rotate/pan the camera down so as to include their whole body, the distance from the camera to the eye remains the same surely? The point of focus is following an arc with the camera's sensor at the centre.
They are saying that if you use the centre point only and then move the camera, say, downwards to recompose, the distance from the point the eye registers on the sensor to has changed, slightly altering the focus point.
I'm not totally convinced that at normal distances and apertures this makes very much difference. At macro distances and very wide apertures it may well do.
Posted 10/07/2012 - 15:51
Link
Hi all,
No doubt we will eventually see some proper reviews of the new K30 which seems to be what the K-01 failed to be.
As to Canon 5D's my pro friend has one bought recently (£1400) body as he can't afford the Mk III (£2999 body)with better autofocus (he mostly uses manual focus anyway)
I recall the K5 being considered dear at £1200 when it came out. Bargain now. Love mine!
No doubt we will eventually see some proper reviews of the new K30 which seems to be what the K-01 failed to be.
As to Canon 5D's my pro friend has one bought recently (£1400) body as he can't afford the Mk III (£2999 body)with better autofocus (he mostly uses manual focus anyway)
I recall the K5 being considered dear at £1200 when it came out. Bargain now. Love mine!
Posted 10/07/2012 - 16:02
Link
JohnX wrote:
The place on the sensor where the eye is recorded has shifted from the centre though, making a slightly longer light path. Some say it's significant, but I'm not sure, as I said.
johnriley wrote:
They are saying that if you use the centre point only and then move the camera, say, downwards to recompose, the distance from the point the eye registers on the sensor to has changed, slightly altering the focus point.
I'm not totally convinced that at normal distances and apertures this makes very much difference. At macro distances and very wide apertures it may well do.
Thanks John. Still don't get it. If I stand and focus on a person's eye, then rotate/pan the camera down so as to include their whole body, the distance from the camera to the eye remains the same surely? The point of focus is following an arc with the camera's sensor at the centre.They are saying that if you use the centre point only and then move the camera, say, downwards to recompose, the distance from the point the eye registers on the sensor to has changed, slightly altering the focus point.
I'm not totally convinced that at normal distances and apertures this makes very much difference. At macro distances and very wide apertures it may well do.
Best regards, John
Posted 10/07/2012 - 16:16
Link
wvbarnes wrote:
No doubt we will eventually see some proper reviews of the new K30 which seems to be what the K-01 failed to be.
They are totally different camera concepts, but you're right in that the K30 incorporates all of what I would consider the K-01's features and puts them in a DSLR body, which I prefer. I really can't wait to try one!
No doubt we will eventually see some proper reviews of the new K30 which seems to be what the K-01 failed to be.
Posted 10/07/2012 - 16:50
Link
johnriley wrote:
Penny's just dropped; thanks John. Now I can see why it's so important to the reviewer.
JohnX wrote:
The place on the sensor where the eye is recorded has shifted from the centre though, making a slightly longer light path. Some say it's significant, but I'm not sure, as I said.johnriley wrote:
They are saying that if you use the centre point only and then move the camera, say, downwards to recompose, the distance from the point the eye registers on the sensor to has changed, slightly altering the focus point.
I'm not totally convinced that at normal distances and apertures this makes very much difference. At macro distances and very wide apertures it may well do.
Thanks John. Still don't get it. If I stand and focus on a person's eye, then rotate/pan the camera down so as to include their whole body, the distance from the camera to the eye remains the same surely? The point of focus is following an arc with the camera's sensor at the centre.They are saying that if you use the centre point only and then move the camera, say, downwards to recompose, the distance from the point the eye registers on the sensor to has changed, slightly altering the focus point.
I'm not totally convinced that at normal distances and apertures this makes very much difference. At macro distances and very wide apertures it may well do.
Posted 10/07/2012 - 17:04
Link
Pentaxophile wrote:
I know! That's what i thought too. Even complaining that the AF isn't quite as good as the Canon 5D mkII is a bit of a weird comparison.
The AF on the 5D MKII is pretty poor by todays standards tbh, they say Canon used a fairly basic system to keep the price of the camera down. Entry level bodies made by other manufacturers should have faster AF than the 4 year old MKII now so if the K-30 doesn't then it's not very encouraging for future higher spec Pentax models.
I know! That's what i thought too. Even complaining that the AF isn't quite as good as the Canon 5D mkII is a bit of a weird comparison.
Posted 10/07/2012 - 17:11
Link
I have begun using the focus select much more now as it really can make a difference with lenses like the 50 1:4.
I depends on your style of movement but it definitely affects the focus point on critical things like portraits.
I would like to see a much more intuitive selection system on the front tho', as trying to get my finger between my face and the back buttons is a pain
I depends on your style of movement but it definitely affects the focus point on critical things like portraits.
I would like to see a much more intuitive selection system on the front tho', as trying to get my finger between my face and the back buttons is a pain
Posted 10/07/2012 - 19:28
Link
I'm glad some people have taken the time to lambast that terrible reviewer on his page. I admit that I wouldn't have been bothered. Life is too short.
Once again lesson learned to not read reviews
Once again lesson learned to not read reviews
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 11/07/2012 - 14:15
Link
Mike-P wrote:
...Entry level bodies made by other manufacturers should have faster AF than the 4 year old MKII now so if the K-30 doesn't then it's not very encouraging for future higher spec Pentax models.
A fair point, but then they really should have compared the AF on the K-30 to one of those other entry level bodies.
...Entry level bodies made by other manufacturers should have faster AF than the 4 year old MKII now so if the K-30 doesn't then it's not very encouraging for future higher spec Pentax models.
My Flickr • Pentax K-5 • K-5 II • Sigma 8-16mm F/4.5-5.6 DC HSM • Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD ASL • SMC Pentax-DA* 50-135mm F/2.8 ED [IF] SDM • SMC Pentax-DA 55-300mm F/4-5.8 ED • SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm F/3.5-5.6 ED AL [IF] WR • Vivitar 100mm F/3.5 Macro AF • Metz Mecablitz 58 AF-2
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
6794 posts
17 years
Nottingham