new features, head auto focus

Pentax has long had , head autofocus in live view, certainly since k30 days.

However a rival has launched a new camera with head autofocus in an optical viewfinder and I am envious.I would really find this useful.

Would anyone else value this feature in a Pentax camera ?

Pentax really need to look at this , regardless of path they take.

Regards

I would like to give some of the competitors eye AF a try. Apparently it is very good.

Head AF ? Less important I think.

Of course there does come a point where the tech means we only have to point a camera somewhere near a subject and press the shutter, or maybe not even that

Doesn't seem like much of a hobby to me when all the skill is removed from it.

Definitely . I’ve had too many group shots ruined with a background nicely in focus, and my foreground subjects blurry out of focus.

Or portraits where the eyebrow or nose is in focus and the eyes blurry.

I’d welcome this for sure.

@pschlute.....I get this auto this and auto that, the camera becomes a large p&s in auto mode.

but sometimes,,,,

Is that with full AF?

Have you tried centre point AF with the back button, then compose the shot... and fire!

Surely nobody really expects a camera to know what you want to focus on? They don't have a mind reading setting (just yet!)

If anyone uses a DSLR as a P&S camera I guess it's pretty well pot luck what you get in focus, as it is with all P&S cameras, some of which don't even have a focus adjustment facility relying instead on the hyperfocal distance helping out. If folk want one of those why spend mega money on a DSLR?

Oh sure. I would use Eye-AF in a heartbeat.

I think it's worth stepping back and checking how you define a point and shoot vs a dslr.
I use a DSLR because I wanted the image quality that came with it, but when pushed I'd need to reveiw that. DSLR's give me the ability to overide auto settings if I want, usually live view with a tripod and manual mode for landscapes/night shots for example.

DSLR's have biggers sensor than most smaller point and shoot cameras, but it does need a good lens too, so if you buy a DSLR and stick with the kit lens, then you're kind of missing the point of an interchangeable lens camera. Potentially a smaller sensor camera with a well matched built in lens would deliver the same image results.

Referencing a point and shoot is difficult these days, as that market is nearly completely gone. Cell phones have taken that segment (like lots of other things they've absorbed - car gps devices, watches, mp3 music players etc) and they've got face tracking AF built in. By contrast to phones and small electronic shutter only compact point and shoots, mirrorless has all the same internals as a DSLR, just minus the mirror and viewfinder prism, so they're basically the same.

I don't see manual focussing as required to distinguish between a DSLR and a point and shoot. If I have auto focus capabilties and chose to use them then I just want them to work to the best possible standard. If I'm pointing at a person or group of people then I'd be quite happy for the camera in auto focus mode to assume I'm pointing at them. I'll focus another way if I'm wanting to focus past them for some reason. iPhones do this, and auto detect people in a scene looking at the camera and focus on them. It's great technology and I'd love it if it was available in a DSLR. Eye AF is even better.

Right now I only use centre focus and single point for static objects, but still peridodically get the background in focus. I use centre focus to identify the target and continuous focus around 9 or more wider points when trying to track sports type situations (like kids in a triathalon running or cycling towards me).

Mirrorless offers something like 500+ AF points right across the sensor, so frankly I feel we're massively missing out being limited to 25 or so around the centre of the frame. Where AF used to be a weakness for mirrorless cameras early on, it's now heading full circle in terms of tracking and eye AF etc, and that's just in stills.

My problem with back button AF is that I am left eye dominant so I always end up poking my right eye. They are so clever with considering where the right thumb ends up but totally ignore the potential use of the left one.

I remember an article , last year at one of the photo exhibitions, an executive of a rival company that had raced ahead with their development of full frame mirrorless
was interviewed.
He was asked , why they had taken the direction they had.
One reason is that , during their market research, they noticed , that although consumers value manual controls, most shoot in some auto or semi auto mode.

The demands from a consumer , who is willing to spend on their hobby , is different from the demands of Pros.

Regards

Could that ever be made to work on a ground glass focussing screen? The whole idea is it down to the photographer to be in control. If the photographer doesn't want to be he's bought the wrong camera.

You the photographer selects which part of the many settings choices you want control over, depending on the shot situation and your knowledge of what the camera will be able to achieve correctly.

This includes the use of semi automatic modes such as Av and Tv, and you interact in various ways, such as exposure compensation to help influence the automatic behaviour.

I don’t see focussing as being any different to the above. Tracking AF is just another automatic tool you can use if you have faith in it, or opt to override. The power is always in the hands of the photographer, to make their choices of settings to get the shot they want.

In my case I struggle to see an exact focus point via an APS-C viewfinder in many situations, especially where wide open apertures are used. Anything that assists with this is appreciated, and I’d welcome smarts that detected people (and not the backgrounds behind them) better. Eye AF event more so.

I am left eye dominant too but don't find it a problem one bit.

I know, they aren't so easy as the old film camera split prism focussing system which I prefer to this day.


How could that ever work viewing on a DSLR ground glass screen. I do reckon you've got the wrong camera for the job if that is the issue. It requires a mirrorless camera or liveview to enable software to evaluate the image data. I can't see it would ever work on a normal focussing screen unless some sort of hybrid viewfinder was added which would introduce other issues. Basically all a DSLR does is look for contrast differences which may or may not be where you want the focus point to be. Are you aware of any true DSLRs at any price that have overcome that and I'm not thinking EVFs which obviously could do what you want (but that doesn't mean they're definitely going to?)

I have eye (and face) AF on my Fujifilm X-T20 and it can be very useful, though a little practice in focus and re-compose on my K-3 produces almost identical results and doesn't have the side effect of focusing on a face when I don't want it to.