I'm considering hiring one for a weekend, to explore exactly that. And if I get one, the tracking will be right under my spotlight for sure.

But who knows, maybe the defaults will be the best option for the majority of cases. You'd hope so, I guess?

Whoosh, perhaps?

This reminds me of something I've never managed to get straight in my head.

I know the theory of balancing ambient and flash but is 1/3 of a stop *really* that significant very often?

I see you've pasted in your 100% crop, there, Chuck

Yes, I know, it was a little tongue-in-cheek.

I'm sure the more highly-skilled will be able get even more out of more advanced kit than the less so, even if the less so can get more out of the new kit than they could with the old.

You're obviously the Chuck Norris* of the camera world, John - Pentax never goes wrong on you, and your AF locks on instantly whether you're in the dark photographing fast-moving objects or in bright daylight photographing buildings

But in my relatively humble reality, I find that my pictures get better as my camera gets better, despite the fact that I've never got as much out of the old cameras as others do.

Basically, I want to be able to achieve, with Pentax, images as good as those MikeP posted a link to recently of the approaching Tornado.

All credit to Mike, his aircraft shots are very good, but unless there are a few rare individuals out there that are miracle workers with manual follow-focus, getting that sequence of shots as sharp as they were has absolutely nothing to do with technical skill, and everything to do with the ability of the AF system to keep up.

______

* In fact, for John 'Chuck' Riley, the whole building probably just jumps instantly to wherever the camera happens to be focused at the time.

Me too.

This is exactly my point. They're cracking shots, better than I can achieve, or at least better than I can achieve with the amount of practice I get.

But give me a camera that has up/down SR but still lets me pan... and I'll be able to do that.

People can post amazing images that they took, hand-held for 5s at 500mm, and I'll be impressed - but it's no use to me if I can't do it.

Yes, absolutely - better kit would make me a better photographer. Maybe not as skilled, but I'd still have the images.

I sometimes wonder if the highly skilled don't really want the technology to advance too far, since it's too much of a leveller.

Chris, from your above comment, I take it that the more you spend on a camera body and a lens the more capable a photographer one becomes?

[/quote]You've worded the question in a very loaded way - obviously I wouldn't disagree for a moment that one can spend a fortune on kit and still produce rubbish. Nor would I argue against improving one's skill.

But to a first approximation, of course it follows that if your kit is better, all other things being equal, you'll be able to produce better photos - or photos that are just as good, more of the time.

The two aren't at all mutually exclusive.

Quicker, more accurate focusing, better metering (bounce flash, anyone?), faster write to card... they all contribute to being able to get the shot whereas with earlier equipment it would have been more difficult.

You yourself have been talking about how much easier it is to focus with the K-3 than the K-5, so I don't see where the controversy is.

___

Edit: note, incidentally, that when I say 'better', I don't necessarily mean more expensive and with more bells and whistles. In the case you cite where someone can't get their head round the 5D Mk II, it's clearly worse (for them, and FAIK, for me too) than a simpler camera.

Here we go again...

No one is saying that it's always the fault of the camera. And no one is saying that Pentax can't be used for sports photography.

But this fantasy that Pentax AF is just as good as the bigger players is just that - a fantasy.

The better the kit, the less one is limited by ability.

Top man.

All this 'all you need is a bit of technique' from certain quarters is nothing more than the Emperor's New Clothes.

If I'm paying £1000 for a bit of kit, I want it to be sufficiently more capable than I am.

You don't buy a dog and then bark yourself.

To confirm, touch can be turned off, yes.

I have the large one - one of the Amazon market place sellers had it on for £259 a month or so back (it was Bamboo Distribution but I can't see them listing it any more - might be worth having a look around); at that price it was a steal.

I had to clear some desk space though...