Re: *istD AF
William Robb wrote: I've had a couple of messages telling me I should really try one of the high end Canons or Nikons to see what their AF can do. There is no way in hell that any AF Pentax would have made that shot unless it is one hell of a crop. Yeah, but what about the Canons and Nikons at the same price point? I'm not being a dick, I truly don't know, and don't have access to the other manufacturer equipment to test it. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
John Sessoms wrote: Second, I hold the shutter release halfway down while following the action, awaiting the critical moment to shoot. But allowing the camera to select the autofocus point has not proved workable. The camera is like as not to choose a point away from the action I'm trying to photograph, leaving my subject out of focus. In fact, when I'm trying to shoot sequences, it's liable to choose different autofocus points for each frame. That's my experience, too. I almost never let the camera choose the AF point. Especially since I sometimes have to bias the AF point to compensate for the shutter lock time. In the situation, subjects moving through large angles while I pan with them, the shutter lock time causes noticeable misplacement of the (vertical) line of focus if I don't manage it manually. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Doug Franklin wrote: William Robb wrote: I've had a couple of messages telling me I should really try one of the high end Canons or Nikons to see what their AF can do. There is no way in hell that any AF Pentax would have made that shot unless it is one hell of a crop. Yeah, but what about the Canons and Nikons at the same price point? I'm not being a dick, I truly don't know, and don't have access to the other manufacturer equipment to test it. Most of them are about as good as the K100D. I don't see much difference in AF performance between a 20D with a 17-40L and the K100D and 16-45 DA, if anything the 20D is a hair faster, but the K100D has better frame coverage and does a bit better in low light courtesy of having more cross sensors. The Nikon D80 is pretty similar, although the D200 has a heftier AF drive motor. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
ann sanfedele escribió: Well the ears fit - but not the high-pitched voice. That would be the real bunny rabbit - Bugs. But, although unfortunately I haven't had the pleasure to meet him in person, I bet he moves fast, at least when cycling. So he meets two of Cotty's requirements. Carlos -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
And less then two hours after writing that, the mailman stopped and delivered a package. I have not much time now left for PDML as you understand. On Thursday 28 December 2006 13:03, Jens Bladt wrote: Frits wrote: I wish the mail man would stop by and hand me my K10D. I'm sure he will - if you order one :-) I will be ordering mine some time in April - from Germany - TeKaDe or whatever - hoping it's still available at that time. I am planning to skip the 6th holliday week, which will then pay for most of my K10D. This way it's almost free :-) Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 28. december 2006 12:03 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Nice shots. You have a very big DOF, which also helps. I am shooting sports with the programline for highest shutterspeed, so lowest DOF. With a lens like mine at 150mm that is still f6.7, I am curious what the new f4 60-250mm lens will give for results in actual use. You have made me curious to find out how the *istD and K10D behave also in continous drive mode, which gives the AF system not much time to maintain focus. Perhaps pick a bicycle rider and make the 5 consecutive shots you asked for, and do this for both cameras. And also compare this with single drive mode results. I wish the mail man would stop by and hand me my K10D. Frits Wüthrich On Thursday 28 December 2006 09:47, Jens Bladt wrote: For these shots I used Auto Selection of focus points. Because the boys were a bit away from me, it worked surprisingly well (the distance beteen me and the boys didn't change much): http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594200497565/show/ The four soccer-shots were taken within 2-3 seconds (according to the the EXIF-data) between 19:35:10 and 19:35:12, July 15th 2006). Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 28. december 2006 09:25 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *istD AF Yes, so it seems. Only in the PDF-manaul this is page 72. So, what does it do, when the subject is fixed and YOU move the CAMERA? It may work fine in theory. But in the real world, the images rarely turn out sharp, if the subject is moving. I can say this because I used this camera close to every day for 28 months, releasing the shutter appr. 45000 times. Perhaps the micro chip can cope (which I doubt), but the speed of the whole system is still slow compared to the mayor players in the high end DSLR segment. To me this is not very important, since I don't do sports photography (perhaps the camera limitations are the real reason for this). When I shoot images like these I use manual focus, because I can't release the shutter at the decisive moment if I use AF: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594101295335/show/ For pro photographers this is obviously a major issue, since they tend to choose faster cameras. I plan to buy a K10D anyway, regardsless that it is using the same old (2003) SAFOX VIII system. Obviously the speed is is not a huge priority for Pentax. Luckily it's the same for me. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 23:14 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Taken from the *istD manual page 74: The camera switches to predictive AF mode automatically when a moving subject is detected in AF.C (Continous mode). Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
From: Frits Wüthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] With the recent discussion in mind that the K10D AF isn't fast enough for football and American football as we call it in the Netherlands, I wanted to show a photograph I made of a hockeygame with my *istD on continues autofocus, using the FA 100-300 f4.5-5.6, a lens not well respected on this list. This sport is at least as fast as the other ones mentioned, but there are not many photos that go wrong on focus with this combo as long as there is enough light. It is a matter of following the action with the shutter halfway down till you reach the decisive moment. I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. Two things - First, my comment was the *istD AF-C is not fast enough for me to shoot American Football and Soccer, nor baseball. I have no idea if the K10D is fast enough. I haven't been able to get my hands on the K10D to try it out. I did note, however, that as yet, none of the high speed focus motor lenses that are supposed to work with the K10D's faster autofocus are available to test it with even if I do. Second, I hold the shutter release halfway down while following the action, awaiting the critical moment to shoot. But allowing the camera to select the autofocus point has not proved workable. The camera is like as not to choose a point away from the action I'm trying to photograph, leaving my subject out of focus. In fact, when I'm trying to shoot sequences, it's liable to choose different autofocus points for each frame. And there's still the problem with the buffer being too small to give sufficient sequential shots.. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. I find for baseball selecting one of the AF points based on where I think the action is going to be in the frame works better. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Yes, I select an autofocus point as well. I usually know where the main action will occur or where the head of the subject will be placed. I shot a bunch of pics today of Grace running in the yard with continuous autofocus and a focus point at the top of the frame with the camera in a vertical position. All of them seem to be in focus. I'm very happy with the Pentax autofocus and know it will be even better with the DA* lenses. Paul On Dec 29, 2006, at 7:51 PM, John Sessoms wrote: From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. I find for baseball selecting one of the AF points based on where I think the action is going to be in the frame works better. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Carlos Royo wrote: Cotty escribió: On 28/12/06, David J Brooks, discombobulated, unleashed: I'll bring a Nikon and my 70-200VR F2.8 for comparison.All of them perform very fast with that lens. Now we need something with tall ears, a high-pitched voice, that moves very fast. Hwho am I thinking of? That's easy: Frank Theriault, the cyclist. Carlos Well the ears fit - but not the high-pitched voice. That would be the real bunny rabbit - Bugs. ann -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
Yes, so it seems. Only in the PDF-manaul this is page 72. So, what does it do, when the subject is fixed and YOU move the CAMERA? It may work fine in theory. But in the real world, the images rarely turn out sharp, if the subject is moving. I can say this because I used this camera close to every day for 28 months, releasing the shutter appr. 45000 times. Perhaps the micro chip can cope (which I doubt), but the speed of the whole system is still slow compared to the mayor players in the high end DSLR segment. To me this is not very important, since I don't do sports photography (perhaps the camera limitations are the real reason for this). When I shoot images like these I use manual focus, because I can't release the shutter at the decisive moment if I use AF: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594101295335/show/ For pro photographers this is obviously a major issue, since they tend to choose faster cameras. I plan to buy a K10D anyway, regardsless that it is using the same old (2003) SAFOX VIII system. Obviously the speed is is not a huge priority for Pentax. Luckily it's the same for me. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 23:14 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Taken from the *istD manual page 74: The camera switches to predictive AF mode automatically when a moving subject is detected in AF.C (Continous mode). Frits Wüthrich On Wednesday 27 December 2006 22:36, Jens Bladt wrote: No, I doubt that this camera does feature predictive AF - it doesn't really track or calculate anything AFAIK. Predictive AF means calculating where the subject will be at the actual time of release - using calculations based on the pattern that a moving object describes on the focus screen. The *ist D does not do such calculations, does it? It's not exactly F16 weapons technolgy :-) Even if it did, it wouldn't work well when the object is moving very directly towards the camera - then there is only VERY little movement to calculate (the movement caused by the subject changing it's size as it's getting closer or farther away). All it does is focus on what ever is close or has high contrast. It's really just a focus trap - that is always a little bit too late. Secondly I never let the camera choose the AF point. I always use the point in the middle. So, this can't be the reason for my shots beeing unsharp either. The only reason I can think of is that it doesn't focus properly on moving objects, because it's too slow. When ever the red square appears, the object is allready out of focus again, before the shutter fires. The K10D and the *ist D does have the same generation AF system, according to dpreview; the SAFOX VIII. I have never heard or read anywhere, that this system had predictive autofocus. The PZ-1 was said to have this (according the the user manual - which says about SERVO mode: The predictive autofocus function is effective in this mode). But I seriously doubt that the camera computer actaully did such focus calculations or really is very predictive. Even if they have just NAMED the servo mode/continuos mode predictable autofucus - it's still not very fast, is it? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af John Francis Sendt: 27. december 2006 21:12 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *istD AF On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. That's a misrepresentation of the history. When you've posted examples in the past, it's often been pointed out to you that the problem lies with the selection of the auto-focus point. The camera is quite capable of tracking moving objects at speeds well in excess of humans walking (as photographs from myself and Doug Franklin, amongst others, demonstrate). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML
RE: *istD AF
For these shots I used Auto Selection of focus points. Because the boys were a bit away from me, it worked surprisingly well (the distance beteen me and the boys didn't change much): http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594200497565/show/ The four soccer-shots were taken within 2-3 seconds (according to the the EXIF-data) between 19:35:10 and 19:35:12, July 15th 2006). Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 28. december 2006 09:25 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *istD AF Yes, so it seems. Only in the PDF-manaul this is page 72. So, what does it do, when the subject is fixed and YOU move the CAMERA? It may work fine in theory. But in the real world, the images rarely turn out sharp, if the subject is moving. I can say this because I used this camera close to every day for 28 months, releasing the shutter appr. 45000 times. Perhaps the micro chip can cope (which I doubt), but the speed of the whole system is still slow compared to the mayor players in the high end DSLR segment. To me this is not very important, since I don't do sports photography (perhaps the camera limitations are the real reason for this). When I shoot images like these I use manual focus, because I can't release the shutter at the decisive moment if I use AF: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594101295335/show/ For pro photographers this is obviously a major issue, since they tend to choose faster cameras. I plan to buy a K10D anyway, regardsless that it is using the same old (2003) SAFOX VIII system. Obviously the speed is is not a huge priority for Pentax. Luckily it's the same for me. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 23:14 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Taken from the *istD manual page 74: The camera switches to predictive AF mode automatically when a moving subject is detected in AF.C (Continous mode). Frits Wüthrich On Wednesday 27 December 2006 22:36, Jens Bladt wrote: No, I doubt that this camera does feature predictive AF - it doesn't really track or calculate anything AFAIK. Predictive AF means calculating where the subject will be at the actual time of release - using calculations based on the pattern that a moving object describes on the focus screen. The *ist D does not do such calculations, does it? It's not exactly F16 weapons technolgy :-) Even if it did, it wouldn't work well when the object is moving very directly towards the camera - then there is only VERY little movement to calculate (the movement caused by the subject changing it's size as it's getting closer or farther away). All it does is focus on what ever is close or has high contrast. It's really just a focus trap - that is always a little bit too late. Secondly I never let the camera choose the AF point. I always use the point in the middle. So, this can't be the reason for my shots beeing unsharp either. The only reason I can think of is that it doesn't focus properly on moving objects, because it's too slow. When ever the red square appears, the object is allready out of focus again, before the shutter fires. The K10D and the *ist D does have the same generation AF system, according to dpreview; the SAFOX VIII. I have never heard or read anywhere, that this system had predictive autofocus. The PZ-1 was said to have this (according the the user manual - which says about SERVO mode: The predictive autofocus function is effective in this mode). But I seriously doubt that the camera computer actaully did such focus calculations or really is very predictive. Even if they have just NAMED the servo mode/continuos mode predictable autofucus - it's still not very fast, is it? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af John Francis Sendt: 27. december 2006 21:12 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *istD AF On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. That's a misrepresentation of the history. When you've posted examples in the past, it's often been pointed out to you that the problem lies with the selection
Re: *istD AF
On 27/12/06, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: Heck - some Canons use 45 AF points (giving a different meaning to the word predictive) as well as two separate micro processors especially dedicated to the focusing system (This may be the reason why a lot of action shooters are Canon users). Pentax does not aim to compete with this at all. If they did, they would have improved the AF system - to SAFOX IX or X or whatever. One thing you must remember here is that the Canon system you describe is found on the 1D series, which is an order of magnitude in price above the level that the K10D is set at. It would be more appropriate to compare the K10D to Canon examples such as the 30D. If you want follow- focus ability on a professional level, you cannot expect it at the price point you are using. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
True, Cotty - my point exactly. When the issue is the AF capability of the K10D - I guess it's fair to say, that it does not represent a vast improvement as far as action shooting is concerned. This camera (or any Pentax camera for that matter) is not especially designated to action shooting. For this purpose other brands offer more obvious choises, allthough at a very different price level. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Cotty Sendt: 28. december 2006 09:47 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF On 27/12/06, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: Heck - some Canons use 45 AF points (giving a different meaning to the word predictive) as well as two separate micro processors especially dedicated to the focusing system (This may be the reason why a lot of action shooters are Canon users). Pentax does not aim to compete with this at all. If they did, they would have improved the AF system - to SAFOX IX or X or whatever. One thing you must remember here is that the Canon system you describe is found on the 1D series, which is an order of magnitude in price above the level that the K10D is set at. It would be more appropriate to compare the K10D to Canon examples such as the 30D. If you want follow- focus ability on a professional level, you cannot expect it at the price point you are using. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Nice shots. You have a very big DOF, which also helps. I am shooting sports with the programline for highest shutterspeed, so lowest DOF. With a lens like mine at 150mm that is still f6.7, I am curious what the new f4 60-250mm lens will give for results in actual use. You have made me curious to find out how the *istD and K10D behave also in continous drive mode, which gives the AF system not much time to maintain focus. Perhaps pick a bicycle rider and make the 5 consecutive shots you asked for, and do this for both cameras. And also compare this with single drive mode results. I wish the mail man would stop by and hand me my K10D. Frits Wüthrich On Thursday 28 December 2006 09:47, Jens Bladt wrote: For these shots I used Auto Selection of focus points. Because the boys were a bit away from me, it worked surprisingly well (the distance beteen me and the boys didn't change much): http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594200497565/show/ The four soccer-shots were taken within 2-3 seconds (according to the the EXIF-data) between 19:35:10 and 19:35:12, July 15th 2006). Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 28. december 2006 09:25 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *istD AF Yes, so it seems. Only in the PDF-manaul this is page 72. So, what does it do, when the subject is fixed and YOU move the CAMERA? It may work fine in theory. But in the real world, the images rarely turn out sharp, if the subject is moving. I can say this because I used this camera close to every day for 28 months, releasing the shutter appr. 45000 times. Perhaps the micro chip can cope (which I doubt), but the speed of the whole system is still slow compared to the mayor players in the high end DSLR segment. To me this is not very important, since I don't do sports photography (perhaps the camera limitations are the real reason for this). When I shoot images like these I use manual focus, because I can't release the shutter at the decisive moment if I use AF: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594101295335/show/ For pro photographers this is obviously a major issue, since they tend to choose faster cameras. I plan to buy a K10D anyway, regardsless that it is using the same old (2003) SAFOX VIII system. Obviously the speed is is not a huge priority for Pentax. Luckily it's the same for me. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 23:14 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Taken from the *istD manual page 74: The camera switches to predictive AF mode automatically when a moving subject is detected in AF.C (Continous mode). Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On 28/12/06, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: True, Cotty - my point exactly. When the issue is the AF capability of the K10D - I guess it's fair to say, that it does not represent a vast improvement as far as action shooting is concerned. This camera (or any Pentax camera for that matter) is not especially designated to action shooting. For this purpose other brands offer more obvious choises, allthough at a very different price level. Well if you are saying that Pentax does not offer a choice in this area then that's true, and one pays one's money and one takes one's choice, as indeed I did a while back. Let's hope that the tie-up with Hoya will lead to better Pentax choices in the coming years :-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
Frits wrote: I wish the mail man would stop by and hand me my K10D. I'm sure he will - if you order one :-) I will be ordering mine some time in April - from Germany - TeKaDe or whatever - hoping it's still available at that time. I am planning to skip the 6th holliday week, which will then pay for most of my K10D. This way it's almost free :-) Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 28. december 2006 12:03 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Nice shots. You have a very big DOF, which also helps. I am shooting sports with the programline for highest shutterspeed, so lowest DOF. With a lens like mine at 150mm that is still f6.7, I am curious what the new f4 60-250mm lens will give for results in actual use. You have made me curious to find out how the *istD and K10D behave also in continous drive mode, which gives the AF system not much time to maintain focus. Perhaps pick a bicycle rider and make the 5 consecutive shots you asked for, and do this for both cameras. And also compare this with single drive mode results. I wish the mail man would stop by and hand me my K10D. Frits Wüthrich On Thursday 28 December 2006 09:47, Jens Bladt wrote: For these shots I used Auto Selection of focus points. Because the boys were a bit away from me, it worked surprisingly well (the distance beteen me and the boys didn't change much): http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594200497565/show/ The four soccer-shots were taken within 2-3 seconds (according to the the EXIF-data) between 19:35:10 and 19:35:12, July 15th 2006). Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 28. december 2006 09:25 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *istD AF Yes, so it seems. Only in the PDF-manaul this is page 72. So, what does it do, when the subject is fixed and YOU move the CAMERA? It may work fine in theory. But in the real world, the images rarely turn out sharp, if the subject is moving. I can say this because I used this camera close to every day for 28 months, releasing the shutter appr. 45000 times. Perhaps the micro chip can cope (which I doubt), but the speed of the whole system is still slow compared to the mayor players in the high end DSLR segment. To me this is not very important, since I don't do sports photography (perhaps the camera limitations are the real reason for this). When I shoot images like these I use manual focus, because I can't release the shutter at the decisive moment if I use AF: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594101295335/show/ For pro photographers this is obviously a major issue, since they tend to choose faster cameras. I plan to buy a K10D anyway, regardsless that it is using the same old (2003) SAFOX VIII system. Obviously the speed is is not a huge priority for Pentax. Luckily it's the same for me. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 23:14 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Taken from the *istD manual page 74: The camera switches to predictive AF mode automatically when a moving subject is detected in AF.C (Continous mode). Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
Yes, perhaps - hopefully - it will. At least the Hoya Pentax HD Corporation controles a lot more muscle as well a larger (planned to come) combined research department :-) BTW: What does HD mean? High Definition? Or is it something like incorporated or ldt ?? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Cotty Sendt: 28. december 2006 12:17 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF On 28/12/06, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: True, Cotty - my point exactly. When the issue is the AF capability of the K10D - I guess it's fair to say, that it does not represent a vast improvement as far as action shooting is concerned. This camera (or any Pentax camera for that matter) is not especially designated to action shooting. For this purpose other brands offer more obvious choises, allthough at a very different price level. Well if you are saying that Pentax does not offer a choice in this area then that's true, and one pays one's money and one takes one's choice, as indeed I did a while back. Let's hope that the tie-up with Hoya will lead to better Pentax choices in the coming years :-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
If it isn't available in April it will be replaced with a better alternative. A mark2, not a downgrade. This is what my crystal ball tells me. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 28. desember 2006 13:04 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: *istD AF Frits wrote: I wish the mail man would stop by and hand me my K10D. I'm sure he will - if you order one :-) I will be ordering mine some time in April - from Germany - TeKaDe or whatever - hoping it's still available at that time. I am planning to skip the 6th holliday week, which will then pay for most of my K10D. This way it's almost free :-) Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 28. december 2006 12:03 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Nice shots. You have a very big DOF, which also helps. I am shooting sports with the programline for highest shutterspeed, so lowest DOF. With a lens like mine at 150mm that is still f6.7, I am curious what the new f4 60-250mm lens will give for results in actual use. You have made me curious to find out how the *istD and K10D behave also in continous drive mode, which gives the AF system not much time to maintain focus. Perhaps pick a bicycle rider and make the 5 consecutive shots you asked for, and do this for both cameras. And also compare this with single drive mode results. I wish the mail man would stop by and hand me my K10D. Frits Wüthrich On Thursday 28 December 2006 09:47, Jens Bladt wrote: For these shots I used Auto Selection of focus points. Because the boys were a bit away from me, it worked surprisingly well (the distance beteen me and the boys didn't change much): http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594200497565/show/ The four soccer-shots were taken within 2-3 seconds (according to the the EXIF-data) between 19:35:10 and 19:35:12, July 15th 2006). Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 28. december 2006 09:25 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *istD AF Yes, so it seems. Only in the PDF-manaul this is page 72. So, what does it do, when the subject is fixed and YOU move the CAMERA? It may work fine in theory. But in the real world, the images rarely turn out sharp, if the subject is moving. I can say this because I used this camera close to every day for 28 months, releasing the shutter appr. 45000 times. Perhaps the micro chip can cope (which I doubt), but the speed of the whole system is still slow compared to the mayor players in the high end DSLR segment. To me this is not very important, since I don't do sports photography (perhaps the camera limitations are the real reason for this). When I shoot images like these I use manual focus, because I can't release the shutter at the decisive moment if I use AF: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594101295335/show/ For pro photographers this is obviously a major issue, since they tend to choose faster cameras. I plan to buy a K10D anyway, regardsless that it is using the same old (2003) SAFOX VIII system. Obviously the speed is is not a huge priority for Pentax. Luckily it's the same for me. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 23:14 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Taken from the *istD manual page 74: The camera switches to predictive AF mode automatically when a moving subject is detected in AF.C (Continous mode). Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/606 - Release Date: 12/28/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
- Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *istD AF True, Cotty - my point exactly. When the issue is the AF capability of the K10D - I guess it's fair to say, that it does not represent a vast improvement as far as action shooting is concerned. This camera (or any Pentax camera for that matter) is not especially designated to action shooting. For this purpose other brands offer more obvious choises, allthough at a very different price level. I've been spending some time in my back yard taking pictures of my two puppies cavorting in the snow. For the most part, I am getting in focus pictures using continuous AF. It falls on it's face when my Belgian is running right at me ang gets within about 6 meters or so, but she tends to be running flat out, and is very fast. I doubt very much if the high end Canons would have a better chance in this situation. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
- Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *istD AF Yes, so it seems. Only in the PDF-manaul this is page 72. So, what does it do, when the subject is fixed and YOU move the CAMERA? It may work fine in theory. But in the real world, the images rarely turn out sharp, if the subject is moving. I can say this because I used this camera close to every day for 28 months, releasing the shutter appr. 45000 times. Perhaps the micro chip can cope (which I doubt), but the speed of the whole system is still slow compared to the mayor players in the high end DSLR segment. To me this is not very important, since I don't do sports photography (perhaps the camera limitations are the real reason for this). When I shoot images like these I use manual focus, because I can't release the shutter at the decisive moment if I use AF: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594101295335/show/ For pro photographers this is obviously a major issue, since they tend to choose faster cameras. I plan to buy a K10D anyway, regardsless that it is using the same old (2003) SAFOX VIII system. Obviously the speed is is not a huge priority for Pentax. Luckily it's the same for me. Predictive AF is a pretty misunderstood tool. It only works if the subject is moving in a predictable (read: straight line) way, and yes, the AF has to be able to keep up with what is happening. John Francis and Doug Franklin are shooting racing cars using Pentax predictive AF, but I know that most field sports photographers tend to use manual focus. The better ones know the sport they are shooting, and can predictwhere the action will take place and be ready for it. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
William Robb wrote: John Francis and Doug Franklin are shooting racing cars using Pentax predictive AF, but I know that most field sports photographers tend to use manual focus. It's easy to get the shots you expect with manual focus, but, without AF, it's very difficult to get the shot when the unexpected happens. So for me it tends to depend on exactly where I am around the track, and whether I've got enough light to have useful amounts of DoF at the primary focal distance. The up side, and the down side, is that I'm often panning through large angles to follow the action, which introduces it's own barrel of focus effects. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
The Limited series that I have used have a smooth focusing feel very reminiscent of the K lenses... Stan On Dec 27, 2006, at 4:24 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: It sounds to me that what you both really want is good manual focus. Thats what I prefer. AF to me it really only good/necessary with action where you just cant keep up manually focussing. For everything else, which is the majority of stuff in my case, I just want really nice, ultra smooth, manual focusing lenses. Lenses Pentax doesnt make anymore unfortunately. e.g. like the older Pentax K/M type lenses. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Godfrey DiGiorgi Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:53 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: *istD AF This is why the QuickShift focusing mount is so helpful. Its Canon workalike ... full time manual focus ... is one of the details that I miss most moving to the Pentax system. With both of them, you let the camera focus as well as it can, then just tweak the focus that little increment to nail what YOU want perfectly. No fussing around with lock and reframe or manipulating the focus point manually ... This is the primary reason I can't wait for the DA35 and DA55 to be released, and why I still consider trading the FA77 for a DA70. Godfrey On Dec 27, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Tom C wrote: I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On 12/28/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been spending some time in my back yard taking pictures of my two puppies cavorting in the snow. For the most part, I am getting in focus pictures using continuous AF. It falls on it's face when my Belgian is running right at me ang gets within about 6 meters or so, but she tends to be running flat out, and is very fast. I doubt very much if the high end Canons would have a better chance in this situation. Like this ;-) http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/55471616 wendy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Oh my God, you've cut off her ears... Very nice shot, illustrates your point. wendy beard wrote: On 12/28/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been spending some time in my back yard taking pictures of my two puppies cavorting in the snow. For the most part, I am getting in focus pictures using continuous AF. It falls on it's face when my Belgian is running right at me ang gets within about 6 meters or so, but she tends to be running flat out, and is very fast. I doubt very much if the high end Canons would have a better chance in this situation. Like this ;-) http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/55471616 wendy -- Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler. --Albert Einstein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
We we're talking about dogs, not polar bears. Tom C. From: wendy beard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: *istD AF Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:30:13 -0500 On 12/28/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been spending some time in my back yard taking pictures of my two puppies cavorting in the snow. For the most part, I am getting in focus pictures using continuous AF. It falls on it's face when my Belgian is running right at me ang gets within about 6 meters or so, but she tends to be running flat out, and is very fast. I doubt very much if the high end Canons would have a better chance in this situation. Like this ;-) http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/55471616 wendy -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On 28/12/06, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: I've been spending some time in my back yard taking pictures of my two puppies cavorting in the snow. For the most part, I am getting in focus pictures using continuous AF. It falls on it's face when my Belgian is running right at me ang gets within about 6 meters or so, but she tends to be running flat out, and is very fast. I doubt very much if the high end Canons would have a better chance in this situation I don't do much photography if this sort, but I have shot a couple of football (soccer) matches. Once with the D60, and once with the 1DmII. The difference was overwhelming, but I put that down to the 'ancient' technology in the D60. Having used the *ist Ds, I now appreciate how good the AF in the 1D is. I've said it many times in the past, but if I knew then what I know now, I would not have purchased a new D60, I would have gone for a used 1D (yes, the original 4MP camera). The quick reaction of the AF is pretty impressive, in both low light and low contrast subjects. I'll bring the 70-200 2.8 so Bill can have a play at GFM. All we need now is a few snarling dogs... -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Quoting Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'll bring the 70-200 2.8 so Bill can have a play at GFM. All we need now is a few snarling dogs... I'll bring a Nikon and my 70-200VR F2.8 for comparison.All of them perform very fast with that lens. Dave -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On 28/12/06, David J Brooks, discombobulated, unleashed: I'll bring a Nikon and my 70-200VR F2.8 for comparison.All of them perform very fast with that lens. Now we need something with tall ears, a high-pitched voice, that moves very fast. Hwho am I thinking of? -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Cotty escribió: On 28/12/06, David J Brooks, discombobulated, unleashed: I'll bring a Nikon and my 70-200VR F2.8 for comparison.All of them perform very fast with that lens. Now we need something with tall ears, a high-pitched voice, that moves very fast. Hwho am I thinking of? That's easy: Frank Theriault, the cyclist. Carlos -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Quoting Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Cotty escribió: On 28/12/06, David J Brooks, discombobulated, unleashed: I'll bring a Nikon and my 70-200VR F2.8 for comparison.All of them perform very fast with that lens. Now we need something with tall ears, a high-pitched voice, that moves very fast. Hwho am I thinking of? That's easy: Frank Theriault, the cyclist. Ahhh, you told. g Dave Carlos -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Quoting Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 28/12/06, David J Brooks, discombobulated, unleashed: I'll bring a Nikon and my 70-200VR F2.8 for comparison.All of them perform very fast with that lens. Now we need something with tall ears, a high-pitched voice, that moves very fast. Hwho am I thinking of? I hear they are in season around June 2-4 in the Carolina's. Dave -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
- Original Message - From: wendy beard Subject: Re: *istD AF Like this ;-) http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/55471616 I've had a couple of messages telling me I should really try one of the high end Canons or Nikons to see what their AF can do. There is no way in hell that any AF Pentax would have made that shot unless it is one hell of a crop. Great picture, did you crop her ears g? William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
- Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: *istD AF On 28/12/06, David J Brooks, discombobulated, unleashed: I'll bring a Nikon and my 70-200VR F2.8 for comparison.All of them perform very fast with that lens. Now we need something with tall ears, a high-pitched voice, that moves very fast. Hwho am I thinking of? See if you can talk Tanja into making the trip from Oz.. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Quoting William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: - Original Message - From: wendy beard Subject: Re: *istD AF Like this ;-) http://www.pbase.com/wendybeard/image/55471616 I've had a couple of messages telling me I should really try one of the high end Canons or Nikons to see what their AF can do. There is no way in hell that any AF Pentax would have made that shot unless it is one hell of a crop. Great picture, did you crop her ears g? Thats why i use Nikon for my paying work. Pentax does a great job as my backup or more specificlly, \my fun stuff Dave William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Frits Wüthrich wrote: This sport is at least as fast as the other ones mentioned, but there are not many photos that go wrong on focus with this combo as long as there is enough light. I agree. I don't have trouble with the *ist D AF tracking racecars, either. I have the 100-300/4.5-5.6 also but haven't used it since I got the 200/2.8 and 300/4.5. I did use the 100-300 at the Petit le Mans with a ZX-6 several years ago, and don't remember any particular problems with the AF then, either. I haven't had a chance to take the K10D to the track yet. leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I don't because with the race cars, I often have to manage the DOF by intentionally biasing the focus point to compensate for the shutter's lock time. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. So, in a way they seem to agree - the AF isn't fast enough for action photography. Alone the slow FPS speed indicates this. If FPS were sharper the AF would never cope. In my understanding the K10D is not really faster than the D. Only write speed is faster. I ma looking forward to hearing about your results in this area. I wont' be getting my K10D until May 1st. So, I'd like to know. What I am looking foreward to is better cropablity, faster write speed and Shake Reduction. Still, faster AF would be very nice. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 15:51 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: *istD AF With the recent discussion in mind that the K10D AF isn't fast enough for football and American football as we call it in the Netherlands, I wanted to show a photograph I made of a hockeygame with my *istD on continues autofocus, using the FA 100-300 f4.5-5.6, a lens not well respected on this list. This sport is at least as fast as the other ones mentioned, but there are not many photos that go wrong on focus with this combo as long as there is enough light. Take a look at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wuthrich/foto/IMGP4879.jpg It is a matter of following the action with the shutter halfway down till you reach the decisive moment. I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I wonder what my K10D will do for me in this area. It was sent to me on 22 Dec from TeKaDe in Germany, it didn't arrive yet, can be any moment now. I need to start saving for the 60-250 lens. -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Oh my, field hockey. I was expecting ice hockey! We had a famous football coach (american) here, a son of Swedish immigrants who made Notre Dame University into a football powerhouse in the '20's. He was a protestant and the University was Roman Catholic. Football came under criticism as too violent a sport. In discussions with the University President, he asked Would you rather have me put a bunch of Irishmen on the field chasing one another around with clubs in their hands? Regards, Bob S. On 12/27/06, Frits Wüthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the recent discussion in mind that the K10D AF isn't fast enough for football and American football as we call it in the Netherlands, I wanted to show a photograph I made of a hockeygame with my *istD on continues autofocus, using the FA 100-300 f4.5-5.6, a lens not well respected on this list. This sport is at least as fast as the other ones mentioned, but there are not many photos that go wrong on focus with this combo as long as there is enough light. Take a look at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wuthrich/foto/IMGP4879.jpg It is a matter of following the action with the shutter halfway down till you reach the decisive moment. I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I wonder what my K10D will do for me in this area. It was sent to me on 22 Dec from TeKaDe in Germany, it didn't arrive yet, can be any moment now. I need to start saving for the 60-250 lens. -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Take a look at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wuthrich/foto/IMGP4879.jpg - Very nice photo, Fritz. You may find that the K10D autofocuses better in low light. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
The relative sharp background indicates (great DOF), that the focus distance is not really that critical here. This is how fast my D and FA* 2..8 80-200mm is: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594048128913/ Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Joseph Tainter Sendt: 27. december 2006 18:35 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF Take a look at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wuthrich/foto/IMGP4879.jpg - Very nice photo, Fritz. You may find that the K10D autofocuses better in low light. Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Great action catch! It can only get better with the 10D. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Frits Wüthrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: *istD AF With the recent discussion in mind that the K10D AF isn't fast enough for football and American football as we call it in the Netherlands, I wanted to show a photograph I made of a hockeygame with my *istD on continues autofocus, using the FA 100-300 f4.5-5.6, a lens not well respected on this list. This sport is at least as fast as the other ones mentioned, but there are not many photos that go wrong on focus with this combo as long as there is enough light. Take a look at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wuthrich/foto/IMGP4879.jpg It is a matter of following the action with the shutter halfway down till you reach the decisive moment. I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I wonder what my K10D will do for me in this area. It was sent to me on 22 Dec from TeKaDe in Germany, it didn't arrive yet, can be any moment now. I need to start saving for the 60-250 lens. -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 10:05:49AM -0500, Doug Franklin wrote: Frits W?thrich wrote: I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I don't because with the race cars, I often have to manage the DOF by intentionally biasing the focus point to compensate for the shutter's lock time. As do I. In fact I'm not too keen on the full-auto-focus mode at any time; I've got a whole stack of shots where *something* is nicely in focus, but it isn't actually what I wanted. The K10D may focus faster, but that's still no help if it's focussing on the wrong thing, and I rather doubt the K10D uses significantly different auto-focus point selection criteria than the *ist-D. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. That's a misrepresentation of the history. When you've posted examples in the past, it's often been pointed out to you that the problem lies with the selection of the auto-focus point. The camera is quite capable of tracking moving objects at speeds well in excess of humans walking (as photographs from myself and Doug Franklin, amongst others, demonstrate). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. Tom C. From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: *istD AF Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:08:18 -0500 On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 10:05:49AM -0500, Doug Franklin wrote: Frits W?thrich wrote: I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I don't because with the race cars, I often have to manage the DOF by intentionally biasing the focus point to compensate for the shutter's lock time. As do I. In fact I'm not too keen on the full-auto-focus mode at any time; I've got a whole stack of shots where *something* is nicely in focus, but it isn't actually what I wanted. The K10D may focus faster, but that's still no help if it's focussing on the wrong thing, and I rather doubt the K10D uses significantly different auto-focus point selection criteria than the *ist-D. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: *istD AF I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. I'd have to go back to the manual to confirm this, but I recall that camera selected AF is the AF point that reads closest to the camera. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
This is why the QuickShift focusing mount is so helpful. Its Canon workalike ... full time manual focus ... is one of the details that I miss most moving to the Pentax system. With both of them, you let the camera focus as well as it can, then just tweak the focus that little increment to nail what YOU want perfectly. No fussing around with lock and reframe or manipulating the focus point manually ... This is the primary reason I can't wait for the DA35 and DA55 to be released, and why I still consider trading the FA77 for a DA70. Godfrey On Dec 27, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Tom C wrote: I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On Wednesday 27 December 2006 16:47, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything Yes, I used (predictive) continious AF. But drive mode on single frame, if that is what confuses you. I wait for the decisive moment, rather then take 2.6 frames per second only to find out later I just missed the one shot in between two frames. A faster FPS would be very welcome though. AF-Single or manual doesn't work for me, I am not vary able to focus manualy for action shots. The photo is a crop of a landscape photo, the height is the full height of the land scape frame. Aperture is 6.7, as it can't go larger at a focal length of 150mm. That does give some more DOF, however focus seems to be spot on. movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. So, in a way they seem to agree - the AF isn't fast enough for action photography. Alone the slow FPS speed indicates this. If FPS were sharper the AF would never cope. Perhaps this is what is different between your shooting style and mine. I can imagine there is not much time for focussing after a photograph was made and the next will be made when the camera is in continuos drive mode. In my understanding the K10D is not really faster than the D. Only write speed is faster. That was not my impression, but I will see in a few days. I ma looking forward to hearing about your results in this area. I wont' be getting my K10D until May 1st. So, I'd like to know. What I am looking foreward to is better cropablity, faster write speed and Shake Reduction. Still, faster AF would be very nice. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 15:51 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: *istD AF With the recent discussion in mind that the K10D AF isn't fast enough for football and American football as we call it in the Netherlands, I wanted to show a photograph I made of a hockeygame with my *istD on continues autofocus, using the FA 100-300 f4.5-5.6, a lens not well respected on this list. This sport is at least as fast as the other ones mentioned, but there are not many photos that go wrong on focus with this combo as long as there is enough light. Take a look at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wuthrich/foto/IMGP4879.jpg It is a matter of following the action with the shutter halfway down till you reach the decisive moment. I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I wonder what my K10D will do for me in this area. It was sent to me on 22 Dec from TeKaDe in Germany, it didn't arrive yet, can be any moment now. I need to start saving for the 60-250 lens. -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On Wednesday 27 December 2006 21:17, Tom C wrote: I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. I do that for portraits also, and then also in AF-Single, but not for sports. Tom C. From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: *istD AF Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:08:18 -0500 On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 10:05:49AM -0500, Doug Franklin wrote: Frits W?thrich wrote: I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I don't because with the race cars, I often have to manage the DOF by intentionally biasing the focus point to compensate for the shutter's lock time. As do I. In fact I'm not too keen on the full-auto-focus mode at any time; I've got a whole stack of shots where *something* is nicely in focus, but it isn't actually what I wanted. The K10D may focus faster, but that's still no help if it's focussing on the wrong thing, and I rather doubt the K10D uses significantly different auto-focus point selection criteria than the *ist-D. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On Dec 27, 2006, at 12:44 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: *istD AF I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. I'd have to go back to the manual to confirm this, but I recall that camera selected AF is the AF point that reads closest to the camera. It doesn't seem to be quite that simple to my eye, watching the behavior when I have complex subject matter I'm framing. Sometimes it hits what I want, sometimes not, and the relative distances don't seem to be the criteria. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
It sounds to me that what you both really want is good manual focus. Thats what I prefer. AF to me it really only good/necessary with action where you just cant keep up manually focussing. For everything else, which is the majority of stuff in my case, I just want really nice, ultra smooth, manual focusing lenses. Lenses Pentax doesnt make anymore unfortunately. e.g. like the older Pentax K/M type lenses. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Godfrey DiGiorgi Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:53 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: *istD AF This is why the QuickShift focusing mount is so helpful. Its Canon workalike ... full time manual focus ... is one of the details that I miss most moving to the Pentax system. With both of them, you let the camera focus as well as it can, then just tweak the focus that little increment to nail what YOU want perfectly. No fussing around with lock and reframe or manipulating the focus point manually ... This is the primary reason I can't wait for the DA35 and DA55 to be released, and why I still consider trading the FA77 for a DA70. Godfrey On Dec 27, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Tom C wrote: I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
No, I doubt that this camera does feature predictive AF - it doesn't really track or calculate anything AFAIK. Predictive AF means calculating where the subject will be at the actual time of release - using calculations based on the pattern that a moving object describes on the focus screen. The *ist D does not do such calculations, does it? It's not exactly F16 weapons technolgy :-) Even if it did, it wouldn't work well when the object is moving very directly towards the camera - then there is only VERY little movement to calculate (the movement caused by the subject changing it's size as it's getting closer or farther away). All it does is focus on what ever is close or has high contrast. It's really just a focus trap - that is always a little bit too late. Secondly I never let the camera choose the AF point. I always use the point in the middle. So, this can't be the reason for my shots beeing unsharp either. The only reason I can think of is that it doesn't focus properly on moving objects, because it's too slow. When ever the red square appears, the object is allready out of focus again, before the shutter fires. The K10D and the *ist D does have the same generation AF system, according to dpreview; the SAFOX VIII. I have never heard or read anywhere, that this system had predictive autofocus. The PZ-1 was said to have this (according the the user manual - which says about SERVO mode: The predictive autofocus function is effective in this mode). But I seriously doubt that the camera computer actaully did such focus calculations or really is very predictive. Even if they have just NAMED the servo mode/continuos mode predictable autofucus - it's still not very fast, is it? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af John Francis Sendt: 27. december 2006 21:12 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *istD AF On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. That's a misrepresentation of the history. When you've posted examples in the past, it's often been pointed out to you that the problem lies with the selection of the auto-focus point. The camera is quite capable of tracking moving objects at speeds well in excess of humans walking (as photographs from myself and Doug Franklin, amongst others, demonstrate). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
I forgot to say this: Anyone - even I - can sometimes get one sharp action shot - one way or the other. But please show me 5 sharp shots (burst) in a row of a fast moving object using a D or a K10D. I have tried to do this with the SAFOX VIII autofocus system. Without any success. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77No, I doubt that this camera does feature predictive AF - it doesn't really track or calculate anything AFAIK. Predictive AF means calculating where the subject will be at the actual time of release - using calculations based on the pattern that a moving object describes on the focus screen. The *ist D does not do such calculations, does it? It's not exactly F16 weapons technolgy :-) Even if it did, it wouldn't work well when the object is moving very directly towards the camera - then there is only VERY little movement to calculate (the movement caused by the subject changing it's size as it's getting closer or farther away). All it does is focus on what ever is close or has high contrast. It's really just a focus trap - that is always a little bit too late. Secondly I never let the camera choose the AF point. I always use the point in the middle. So, this can't be the reason for my shots beeing unsharp either. The only reason I can think of is that it doesn't focus properly on moving objects, because it's too slow. When ever the red square appears, the object is allready out of focus again, before the shutter fires. The K10D and the *ist D does have the same generation AF system, according to dpreview; the SAFOX VIII. I have never heard or read anywhere, that this system had predictive autofocus. The PZ-1 was said to have this (according the the user manual - which says about SERVO mode: The predictive autofocus function is effective in this mode). But I seriously doubt that the camera computer actaully did such focus calculations or really is very predictive. Even if they have just NAMED the servo mode/continuos mode predictable autofucus - it's still not very fast, is it? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af John Francis Sendt: 27. december 2006 21:12 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *istD AF On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. That's a misrepresentation of the history. When you've posted examples in the past, it's often been pointed out to you that the problem lies with the selection of the auto-focus point. The camera is quite capable of tracking moving objects at speeds well in excess of humans walking (as photographs from myself and Doug Franklin, amongst others, demonstrate). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 02:44:59PM -0600, William Robb wrote: I'd have to go back to the manual to confirm this, but I recall that camera selected AF is the AF point that reads closest to the camera. I don't believe there is anything in the manual that describes the algorithm. It certainly isn't as simple as 'always closest'. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
I seem to have read that FPS of the K10D is a tiny bit faster than the D. Write speed is faster and the buffer is larger. But the AF system has not changed. It's still SAFOX VIII. Your shot is excellent. But IMO it's more an exception than a rule about how the D perform action shooting/autofocus. The fact that some list members use manual focus rather than AF for this type of shooting seems to confirm this. Let's face it - Safox VIII is not the fastest or most accurate or most predictive AF system on this planet Heck - some Canons use 45 AF points (giving a different meaning to the word predictive) as well as two separate micro processors especially dedicated to the focusing system (This may be the reason why a lot of action shooters are Canon users). Pentax does not aim to compete with this at all. If they did, they would have improved the AF system - to SAFOX IX or X or whatever. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 22:08 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *istD AF On Wednesday 27 December 2006 16:47, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything Yes, I used (predictive) continious AF. But drive mode on single frame, if that is what confuses you. I wait for the decisive moment, rather then take 2.6 frames per second only to find out later I just missed the one shot in between two frames. A faster FPS would be very welcome though. AF-Single or manual doesn't work for me, I am not vary able to focus manualy for action shots. The photo is a crop of a landscape photo, the height is the full height of the land scape frame. Aperture is 6.7, as it can't go larger at a focal length of 150mm. That does give some more DOF, however focus seems to be spot on. movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. So, in a way they seem to agree - the AF isn't fast enough for action photography. Alone the slow FPS speed indicates this. If FPS were sharper the AF would never cope. Perhaps this is what is different between your shooting style and mine. I can imagine there is not much time for focussing after a photograph was made and the next will be made when the camera is in continuos drive mode. In my understanding the K10D is not really faster than the D. Only write speed is faster. That was not my impression, but I will see in a few days. I ma looking forward to hearing about your results in this area. I wont' be getting my K10D until May 1st. So, I'd like to know. What I am looking foreward to is better cropablity, faster write speed and Shake Reduction. Still, faster AF would be very nice. Regards Jens Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Frits Wüthrich Sendt: 27. december 2006 15:51 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: *istD AF With the recent discussion in mind that the K10D AF isn't fast enough for football and American football as we call it in the Netherlands, I wanted to show a photograph I made of a hockeygame with my *istD on continues autofocus, using the FA 100-300 f4.5-5.6, a lens not well respected on this list. This sport is at least as fast as the other ones mentioned, but there are not many photos that go wrong on focus with this combo as long as there is enough light. Take a look at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wuthrich/foto/IMGP4879.jpg It is a matter of following the action with the shutter halfway down till you reach the decisive moment. I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I wonder what my K10D will do for me in this area. It was sent to me on 22 Dec from TeKaDe in Germany, it didn't arrive yet, can be any moment now. I need to start saving for the 60-250 lens. -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- Frits Wüthrich -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG
Re: *istD AF
You have good manual focus with the Quick shift Limited lenses. You can do your fine manual adjustments after the AF has made it´s suggestion. DagT Den 27. des. 2006 kl. 22.24 skrev J. C. O'Connell: It sounds to me that what you both really want is good manual focus. Thats what I prefer. AF to me it really only good/necessary with action where you just cant keep up manually focussing. For everything else, which is the majority of stuff in my case, I just want really nice, ultra smooth, manual focusing lenses. Lenses Pentax doesnt make anymore unfortunately. e.g. like the older Pentax K/M type lenses. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Godfrey DiGiorgi Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 3:53 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: *istD AF This is why the QuickShift focusing mount is so helpful. Its Canon workalike ... full time manual focus ... is one of the details that I miss most moving to the Pentax system. With both of them, you let the camera focus as well as it can, then just tweak the focus that little increment to nail what YOU want perfectly. No fussing around with lock and reframe or manipulating the focus point manually ... This is the primary reason I can't wait for the DA35 and DA55 to be released, and why I still consider trading the FA77 for a DA70. Godfrey On Dec 27, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Tom C wrote: I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
- Original Message - From: Godfrey DiGiorgi Subject: Re: *istD AF I was never happy with the camera-selected AF point. How can it possibly know my composition? I'm the 'pre-focus using center point then compose type'. I'd have to go back to the manual to confirm this, but I recall that camera selected AF is the AF point that reads closest to the camera. It doesn't seem to be quite that simple to my eye, watching the behavior when I have complex subject matter I'm framing. Sometimes it hits what I want, sometimes not, and the relative distances don't seem to be the criteria. I just had a quick, very informal, look at the AF operation on the K10. In autoselect, it seems to prefer the closest object, but by no means is it focusing on the closest object all the time. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Taken from the *istD manual page 74: The camera switches to predictive AF mode automatically when a moving subject is detected in AF.C (Continous mode). Frits Wüthrich On Wednesday 27 December 2006 22:36, Jens Bladt wrote: No, I doubt that this camera does feature predictive AF - it doesn't really track or calculate anything AFAIK. Predictive AF means calculating where the subject will be at the actual time of release - using calculations based on the pattern that a moving object describes on the focus screen. The *ist D does not do such calculations, does it? It's not exactly F16 weapons technolgy :-) Even if it did, it wouldn't work well when the object is moving very directly towards the camera - then there is only VERY little movement to calculate (the movement caused by the subject changing it's size as it's getting closer or farther away). All it does is focus on what ever is close or has high contrast. It's really just a focus trap - that is always a little bit too late. Secondly I never let the camera choose the AF point. I always use the point in the middle. So, this can't be the reason for my shots beeing unsharp either. The only reason I can think of is that it doesn't focus properly on moving objects, because it's too slow. When ever the red square appears, the object is allready out of focus again, before the shutter fires. The K10D and the *ist D does have the same generation AF system, according to dpreview; the SAFOX VIII. I have never heard or read anywhere, that this system had predictive autofocus. The PZ-1 was said to have this (according the the user manual - which says about SERVO mode: The predictive autofocus function is effective in this mode). But I seriously doubt that the camera computer actaully did such focus calculations or really is very predictive. Even if they have just NAMED the servo mode/continuos mode predictable autofucus - it's still not very fast, is it? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af John Francis Sendt: 27. december 2006 21:12 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *istD AF On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. That's a misrepresentation of the history. When you've posted examples in the past, it's often been pointed out to you that the problem lies with the selection of the auto-focus point. The camera is quite capable of tracking moving objects at speeds well in excess of humans walking (as photographs from myself and Doug Franklin, amongst others, demonstrate). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF
Heck - some Canons use 45 AF points (giving a different meaning to the word predictive) as well as two separate micro processors especially dedicated to the focusing system (This may be the reason why a lot of action shooters are Canon users). Pentax does not aim to compete with this at all. If they did, they would have improved the AF system - to SAFOX IX or X or whatever. Regards Jens Bladt Pentax Corp. chose the Shake Reduction approach to more in focus images. They knew quite well that Pentax users shudder and tremble with an almost paroxysmal excitement whenever they get to touch the object of their desire. ;-) Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Excellent shot, Frits! I used the *ist-D for shooting high school swim meets using the continuous AF setting. Like you I usually let the camera pick the AF point. Not every shot came out and I had to learn a few tricks - like focusing on the water in front of a fast butterfly swimmer coming head on, or pre-focusing manually to shot some of the dives. But over all, the AF performance was fine - I alway brought back a few hundred shots after each meet for the parents to buy. - MCC Frits Wüthrich wrote: With the recent discussion in mind that the K10D AF isn't fast enough for football and American football as we call it in the Netherlands, I wanted to show a photograph I made of a hockeygame with my *istD on continues autofocus, using the FA 100-300 f4.5-5.6, a lens not well respected on this list. This sport is at least as fast as the other ones mentioned, but there are not many photos that go wrong on focus with this combo as long as there is enough light. Take a look at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wuthrich/foto/IMGP4879.jpg It is a matter of following the action with the shutter halfway down till you reach the decisive moment. I leave choosing the autofocus point up to the camera. I wonder what my K10D will do for me in this area. It was sent to me on 22 Dec from TeKaDe in Germany, it didn't arrive yet, can be any moment now. I need to start saving for the 60-250 lens. -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
Jens Bladt wrote: I seem to have read that FPS of the K10D is a tiny bit faster than the D. Write speed is faster and the buffer is larger. But the AF system has not changed. It's still SAFOX VIII. Your shot is excellent. But IMO it's more an exception than a rule about how the D perform action shooting/autofocus. The fact that some list members use manual focus rather than AF for this type of shooting seems to confirm this. Let's face it - Safox VIII is not the fastest or most accurate or most predictive AF system on this planet SAFOX VIII is the sensor design, not the entire AF assembly. The K series have greatly improved AF algorithms over the earlier bodies. The D and K100D are similar in speed (K100D is a little faster) since the D still has a more powerful motor than the K100D, which makes up to some extent for the slower and less positive AF algorithm. The K10D has the D's motor, driven even faster by the higher voltage of the Li-Ion battery, and AF algorithms improved over the K100D. It's very definitely faster than earlier Pentax's. Also one area in which SAFOX VIII excels is focus accuracy, unlike the units in most similar bodies from other vendors (D80 and Canon Rebel XTi/400D excepted, they use sensors inherited from much higher-spec bodies) Heck - some Canons use 45 AF points (giving a different meaning to the word predictive) as well as two separate micro processors especially dedicated to the focusing system (This may be the reason why a lot of action shooters are Canon users). Canon uses one microprocessor dedicated to the AF system on the 1 series bodies and another for everything else (The digitals add a third, the DiGiC processor for image processing). Note that the 45 points of the Canon AF unit are all concentrated in the centre of the frame and cover less of the frame than the 11 point units in the D, DS and K bodies (As well as the similar 11 point unit in the Nikon D2's and F6). That's the big weakness of the Canon's. Pentax does not aim to compete with this at all. If they did, they would have improved the AF system - to SAFOX IX or X or whatever. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk Saying that belies a great misunderstanding of the AF performance of the newer bodies. I suggest you try a K series body before making any claims about their performance. The SAFOX VIII designation merely refers to the sensor design, which is only a small part of AF performance (witness the differences in performance between the DL's and the other SAFOX VIII bodies, the DL's use a cut-down version of the SAFOX VIII sensor that isn't nearly as good). -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: *istD AF
SAFOX VIII is the sensor. The designation doesn't include the AF algorithms, which are seriously improved on the K series bodies. And the D very definitely has predictive AF. So do all of the SAFOX VIII equipped bodies. -Adam Jens Bladt wrote: No, I doubt that this camera does feature predictive AF - it doesn't really track or calculate anything AFAIK. Predictive AF means calculating where the subject will be at the actual time of release - using calculations based on the pattern that a moving object describes on the focus screen. The *ist D does not do such calculations, does it? It's not exactly F16 weapons technolgy :-) Even if it did, it wouldn't work well when the object is moving very directly towards the camera - then there is only VERY little movement to calculate (the movement caused by the subject changing it's size as it's getting closer or farther away). All it does is focus on what ever is close or has high contrast. It's really just a focus trap - that is always a little bit too late. Secondly I never let the camera choose the AF point. I always use the point in the middle. So, this can't be the reason for my shots beeing unsharp either. The only reason I can think of is that it doesn't focus properly on moving objects, because it's too slow. When ever the red square appears, the object is allready out of focus again, before the shutter fires. The K10D and the *ist D does have the same generation AF system, according to dpreview; the SAFOX VIII. I have never heard or read anywhere, that this system had predictive autofocus. The PZ-1 was said to have this (according the the user manual - which says about SERVO mode: The predictive autofocus function is effective in this mode). But I seriously doubt that the camera computer actaully did such focus calculations or really is very predictive. Even if they have just NAMED the servo mode/continuos mode predictable autofucus - it's still not very fast, is it? Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af John Francis Sendt: 27. december 2006 21:12 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *istD AF On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: Very nice photograph - in fact it's excellent! This was not done with continous AF, was it? Well, at some distance any photograph is always sharp. Only not necessarily where you wnat it to be. In my experience the *istD AF/Continuos AF is not fast enough for anything movuing faster than a walking human. I have pointed this out many times on this list. Other list members allways seem to answer me, that shots like this must be done using MF. That's a misrepresentation of the history. When you've posted examples in the past, it's often been pointed out to you that the problem lies with the selection of the auto-focus point. The camera is quite capable of tracking moving objects at speeds well in excess of humans walking (as photographs from myself and Doug Franklin, amongst others, demonstrate). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.28/604 - Release Date: 12/26/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Well... Canons don't always get what you exåect. I danish guy wrote this at Photo.net: Can anybody help. I have just been to Miami to shoot for a danish magazine and around all my photos (90%) is out of focus ? i use a EOS 1Ds camara and with EF 24-70 L USM - EF 100 USM macro and a 70-200 L USM IS lenses. I never used a tripod and around 250 shutter speed all time and also from bl. 4 to 5.6 mostly because i shoot fashion. I dont understand why most of all my photos is blurered i tough Canon lenses was the best and fastest auto focus on the market. I even tryed single AF point in the middle and also the auto AF point 45 both ways i never got some really sharp pictures. I remember in the old days with film a Canon EOS 5 or Nikon 5 all pictures was focused is there any special rules for Digital i mean, shutter speed and Bl. is same thing right Shutter speed 250 must be shutter speed 250 on both camaras or do you always need a faster shutter speed with digital ? please i need help fast ! kind regard Mugge T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! Cheers Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
On 17/1/05, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: Well... Canons don't always get what you exåect. I danish guy wrote this at Photo.net: Can anybody help. I have just been to Miami to shoot for a danish magazine and around all my photos (90%) is out of focus ? i use a EOS 1Ds camara and with EF 24-70 L USM - EF 100 USM macro and a 70-200 L USM IS lenses. I never used a tripod and around 250 shutter speed all time and also from bl. 4 to 5.6 mostly because i shoot fashion. I dont understand why most of all my photos is blurered i tough Canon lenses was the best and fastest auto focus on the market. I even tryed single AF point in the middle and also the auto AF point 45 both ways i never got some really sharp pictures. I remember in the old days with film a Canon EOS 5 or Nikon 5 all pictures was focused is there any special rules for Digital i mean, shutter speed and Bl. is same thing right Shutter speed 250 must be shutter speed 250 on both camaras or do you always need a faster shutter speed with digital ? please i need help fast ! kind regard Mugge T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! Sorry Jens, the only thing this proves to me is that the operator didn't put enough time/resources into understanding how to operate the gear properly. The fact he's posting to Photo.net illustrates lack of resourcefulness to me. It's a bit like me writing to Cow.net and saying that I bought a cow, put a bucket under the cow and squeezed the teats, but nothing happened. What am I doing wrong? (Answer, of course, is get the cow pregnant first ;-) The point I am making is that just because someone says something doesn't work properly, does not mean that it is not working properly. Ever heard the expression 'a poor workman always blames his tools' ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Well cut the fellow a little slack, Cotty. Perhaps he just isn't too bright. After all, he *is* a Canon user. ;-) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Cotty wrote: Well cut the fellow a little slack, Cotty. Perhaps he just isn't too bright. After all, he *is* a Canon user. ;-) ARGHH Point taken LOL I thought Jens shoots Pentax! ;-))) Kostas
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
I thought Jens shoots Pentax! ;-))) better shoot with Pentax than being shot by Canon ;-) Bedo.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
On 17/1/05, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Well cut the fellow a little slack, Cotty. Perhaps he just isn't too bright. After all, he *is* a Canon user. ;-) ARGHH Point taken LOL Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
- Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Uranus. Or if not ur's, somebody's. This allows me to bring up my pet peeve of the past couple of decades, which is: The cameras are taking on so much of the technical side of photography, freeing up the photographer to do what? Well, it seems often, it is freeing up the photographer to be stupid, not know his theory, and hence screw up on the practical side of things, which is the taking of photographs. Sadly, this doltishness is not limited to snapshooters with point and shoots. Often, the pro boys are not much better. William Robb
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Q. To be a successful professional photographer, what 3 things do you most need to know about photography? A. 1. Marketing, 2. Marketing, 3. Marketing. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Cotty Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Uranus. Or if not ur's, somebody's. This allows me to bring up my pet peeve of the past couple of decades, which is: The cameras are taking on so much of the technical side of photography, freeing up the photographer to do what? Well, it seems often, it is freeing up the photographer to be stupid, not know his theory, and hence screw up on the practical side of things, which is the taking of photographs. Sadly, this doltishness is not limited to snapshooters with point and shoots. Often, the pro boys are not much better. William Robb -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.13 - Release Date: 1/16/2005
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
I guess 10-30mm off could be considered out of focus. The camera may have been foccusing at the nose, not the eyes! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 14:44 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) On 17/1/05, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Well cut the fellow a little slack, Cotty. Perhaps he just isn't too bright. After all, he *is* a Canon user. ;-) ARGHH Point taken LOL Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
I agree, Cotty. He probably had the camera choose the wrong focus points most of the time. Furthermore 1/250 sec. is perhaps a bit on the slow side. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 10:24 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) On 17/1/05, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: Well... Canons don't always get what you exåect. I danish guy wrote this at Photo.net: Can anybody help. I have just been to Miami to shoot for a danish magazine and around all my photos (90%) is out of focus ? i use a EOS 1Ds camara and with EF 24-70 L USM - EF 100 USM macro and a 70-200 L USM IS lenses. I never used a tripod and around 250 shutter speed all time and also from bl. 4 to 5.6 mostly because i shoot fashion. I dont understand why most of all my photos is blurered i tough Canon lenses was the best and fastest auto focus on the market. I even tryed single AF point in the middle and also the auto AF point 45 both ways i never got some really sharp pictures. I remember in the old days with film a Canon EOS 5 or Nikon 5 all pictures was focused is there any special rules for Digital i mean, shutter speed and Bl. is same thing right Shutter speed 250 must be shutter speed 250 on both camaras or do you always need a faster shutter speed with digital ? please i need help fast ! kind regard Mugge T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! Sorry Jens, the only thing this proves to me is that the operator didn't put enough time/resources into understanding how to operate the gear properly. The fact he's posting to Photo.net illustrates lack of resourcefulness to me. It's a bit like me writing to Cow.net and saying that I bought a cow, put a bucket under the cow and squeezed the teats, but nothing happened. What am I doing wrong? (Answer, of course, is get the cow pregnant first ;-) The point I am making is that just because someone says something doesn't work properly, does not mean that it is not working properly. Ever heard the expression 'a poor workman always blames his tools' ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
I don't know the 1Ds. But, I believe 95% of all digies are less than full frame. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 12:48 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
the 1Ds does lock on a subject and track its motion provided that it stays under any one of the focus points. it will track a moving bird or football player provided that you aim the camera roughly aimed correctly. no Pentax camera does this well enough to really useful, but the Canon 1D system does. Herb... - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:01 AM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) I agree. But my point was that there's no locking on to the subject. It's just the focus system catching whatever comes by, close to the previous focusing distance. If I was photographing a group of kids running at the playground, the camera might catch a girl, then a boy, next time a dog or a bird. There' s no locking onto anything. I don't believe any mass produced camera system can do that.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Herb Chong wrote: the 1Ds does lock on a subject and track its motion provided that it stays under any one of the focus points. it will track a moving bird or football player provided that you aim the camera roughly aimed correctly. no Pentax camera does this well enough to really useful, but the Canon 1D system does. I'll second Herb's point. The 1D___'s seem to do this very well- the results even look more successful than what you're seeing in the viewfinder. -Ryan
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
On 17/1/05, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: I agree, Cotty. He probably had the camera choose the wrong focus points most of the time. Furthermore 1/250 sec. is perhaps a bit on the slow side. Yes but for what focal length? and at what ISO?? And what was the condition of the photographer? was he missing his morning line of coke?? There are so many variables. My favourite line from one of my favourite movies is the scene in The War Room in Kubrick's 'Dr. Strangelove' where General Buck Turgidson (played brilliantly by George C Scott) ushers caution to President Muffley (Peter Sellers) by saying: 'Well, I'd like to hold off judgment on a thing like that, sir, until all the facts are in.' I agree. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Didn't Contax make one too? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 22:42 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Just the Canon, and the Kodak semi twins, (c/n), are full frame as far as I can recall. Jens Bladt wrote: I don't know the 1Ds. But, I believe 95% of all digies are less than full frame. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 12:48 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
If we knew, could we send them back? Cotty wrote: On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Just the Canon, and the Kodak semi twins, (c/n), are full frame as far as I can recall. Jens Bladt wrote: I don't know the 1Ds. But, I believe 95% of all digies are less than full frame. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 12:48 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Oooh, good one! Mark Roberts wrote: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Well cut the fellow a little slack, Cotty. Perhaps he just isn't too bright. After all, he *is* a Canon user. ;-) -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
You're right and a good example of why Pentax abandoned marketing the MZ-D or whatever it would have been called. Jens Bladt wrote: Didn't Contax make one too? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 22:42 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Just the Canon, and the Kodak semi twins, (c/n), are full frame as far as I can recall. Jens Bladt wrote: I don't know the 1Ds. But, I believe 95% of all digies are less than full frame. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 12:48 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Full Frame: Kodak can, Canon can, Nikon can, Contax just about did it, Pentax nearly could! Ths makes Pentax a winner! I see. Thank you. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. januar 2005 02:46 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) You're right and a good example of why Pentax abandoned marketing the MZ-D or whatever it would have been called. Jens Bladt wrote: Didn't Contax make one too? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 22:42 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Just the Canon, and the Kodak semi twins, (c/n), are full frame as far as I can recall. Jens Bladt wrote: I don't know the 1Ds. But, I believe 95% of all digies are less than full frame. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 12:48 Til: pentax list Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) On 17/1/05, Cotty, discombobulated, unleashed: T answer his question: Yes, there's is a difference. Due to the grater enlargement (crop factor) the shutter speed necessary to freeze movent must be divided by the crop factor: If i.e. a 250mm is used: 1/250 divided by i.e. 1.5 = 1/375 sec. 90% out of focus! That bad! I mean for crying out loud, it's a 1Ds - there *is no crop factor* involved - it's a full frame camera. What planet do these people come from ? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Yes. ...what they all will say, in order to sell. Don't believe everything you read in an ad! I guess tracking describes the currently available AF functions better than locking. What they mean by locking is simply focus or obtain focus confirmation. But focus confirmation just indicates that something is in focus. Tracking might be close to what Minolta called predictable auto focus when the Dynaxes were introduced. The camera can predict a (single) subjects movement across the screen to determine the place where it will be, at the real time of the release. Since the introduction of multiple focus points, I haven't seen predictable AF in the ads anymore. Pentax PZ-1 had a similar description (predictable AF in Continuous mode) in its user manual. Today this is just called continuous focus C. C jsut means the camera will try to refocus whenever the subject gets out of focus. It will then perhaps focus onsomthning else - perhaps the next guy in a line. I don't know they (C) can actually predict anything anymore. In my world (Pentax) there's just Single and Continuous. And then there's the automatic selection of focusing point. This simply means multiple sigle or multiple continuous. These features will allow the camera to focus on just about anything. I suppose that's quite the opposite of locking on to a (single) subject. I'd love to be around on the day they invent a camera you can point at the centre forward at the beginning of a soccer game, give you focus confirmation and then stay focused on the guy for the rest of that half. I suppose true locking will require some kind of 3D focusing system combined with computerized optical recognition. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 16. januar 2005 00:53 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) tracking and locking are the same thing in most manufacturer's literature. Herb - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 6:43 PM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) About locking onto something: To me this means focusing on a subject, then stay focused at the same subject, even if it moves. No camera that I know of does this. Not even the Canon D1. Cameras loose focus when things move, but may refocus at the same subject after a while. Or it may focus on something else! That's not locking onto a subject, is it? Tracking perhaps, but certainly not locking.
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
I'd love to be around on the day they invent a camera you can point at the centre forward at the beginning of a soccer game, give you focus confirmation and then stay focused on the guy for the rest of that half. I suppose true locking will require some kind of 3D focusing system combined with computerized optical recognition. I guess it would be even better if the camera could just stay focused on the ball! :-) Jens mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 16. januar 2005 09:21 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Yes. ...what they all will say, in order to sell. Don't believe everything you read in an ad! I guess tracking describes the currently available AF functions better than locking. What they mean by locking is simply focus or obtain focus confirmation. But focus confirmation just indicates that something is in focus. Tracking might be close to what Minolta called predictable auto focus when the Dynaxes were introduced. The camera can predict a (single) subjects movement across the screen to determine the place where it will be, at the real time of the release. Since the introduction of multiple focus points, I haven't seen predictable AF in the ads anymore. Pentax PZ-1 had a similar description (predictable AF in Continuous mode) in its user manual. Today this is just called continuous focus C. C jsut means the camera will try to refocus whenever the subject gets out of focus. It will then perhaps focus onsomthning else - perhaps the next guy in a line. I don't know they (C) can actually predict anything anymore. In my world (Pentax) there's just Single and Continuous. And then there's the automatic selection of focusing point. This simply means multiple sigle or multiple continuous. These features will allow the camera to focus on just about anything. I suppose that's quite the opposite of locking on to a (single) subject. I'd love to be around on the day they invent a camera you can point at the centre forward at the beginning of a soccer game, give you focus confirmation and then stay focused on the guy for the rest of that half. I suppose true locking will require some kind of 3D focusing system combined with computerized optical recognition. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 16. januar 2005 00:53 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) tracking and locking are the same thing in most manufacturer's literature. Herb - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 6:43 PM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) About locking onto something: To me this means focusing on a subject, then stay focused at the same subject, even if it moves. No camera that I know of does this. Not even the Canon D1. Cameras loose focus when things move, but may refocus at the same subject after a while. Or it may focus on something else! That's not locking onto a subject, is it? Tracking perhaps, but certainly not locking.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
On 16/1/05, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: I handled one of the very first five Canon D1's, when they first came to Europe (2001?) at a Canon presentation in Cork, Ireland. It had 45 focus points. The viewfinder was totally covered with focus points - they lit up like the neon lights of Las Vegas, when the camera was moved. The focus changed as fast as I could move the camera. And it took 4-8 frames every time I pressed the shutter (8 fps). It sounded like a freaking Uzi! The focus points can be set so that they do not light up, and can be set so that all or some or one are active. About locking onto something: To me this means focusing on a subject, then stay focused at the same subject, even if it moves. No camera that I know of does this. Not even the Canon D1. The 1D can do this no problem. It also has predictive focussing so that if a bird is flying towards you, it realises this and moves the focus to stay with it. I tend to use manual focus for most things, but I was shooting a soccer match the other day at a school (my son was playing) until I was spotted and told photography was not permitted on school grounds with written permission (shoot first ask questions later). Out of about a hundred frames, I noticed one was a bit soft on the subject (my son) - and that was because he darted behind another player and the camera got confused. I think the ideal focus system would be like that super-duper handheld weapon in 'The Fifth Element' that Zorg demonstrates to a horde of unruly aliens whereby when it is fired at the target, all subsequent firings hit the same target no matter where the weapon is pointed! http://www.geekroar.com/film/archives/5th_goldman.jpg :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
I wouldn't be sure the D1 would focus/refocus at the same object every time! Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 16. januar 2005 14:22 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) this is the reason for my original comments. i know the 1D can do this. i've seen the photographic results. Herb - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 5:48 AM Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) About locking onto something: To me this means focusing on a subject, then stay focused at the same subject, even if it moves. No camera that I know of does this. Not even the Canon D1. The 1D can do this no problem. It also has predictive focussing so that if a bird is flying towards you, it realises this and moves the focus to stay with it.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
this is the reason for my original comments. i know the 1D can do this. i've seen the photographic results. Herb - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax list pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 5:48 AM Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) About locking onto something: To me this means focusing on a subject, then stay focused at the same subject, even if it moves. No camera that I know of does this. Not even the Canon D1. The 1D can do this no problem. It also has predictive focussing so that if a bird is flying towards you, it realises this and moves the focus to stay with it.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
every time isn't the issue. 90% is good enough to make not using it when available stupid. Herb... - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 10:17 AM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) I wouldn't be sure the D1 would focus/refocus at the same object every time!
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
I agree. But my point was that there's no locking on to the subject. It's just the focus system catching whatever comes by, close to the previous focusing distance. If I was photographing a group of kids running at the playground, the camera might catch a girl, then a boy, next time a dog or a bird. There s no locking onto anything. I don't believe any mass produced camera system can do that. I have tried to walk slowly towards a fixed subject with great contrast, having set the AF on the *ist D to Continuous. When walking quite slowly, the camera could give focus confirmation once for every single step I took. That's app. once every second or every half-second. That is certainly not very impressing. In fact I can do better using manual focus. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 17. januar 2005 01:33 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) every time isn't the issue. 90% is good enough to make not using it when available stupid. Herb... - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 10:17 AM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) I wouldn't be sure the D1 would focus/refocus at the same object every time!
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Hi, Herb Chong wrote: you're deliberately conflating two entirely different field's terminologies to make your point, just like JCO's pointless argument that no lens can possibly show anything 3D because the imaging surface is a flat plane. locking on in autofocus cameras means what i said. But _as Jens said_ it is not the same as locking on in weaponry, which is an active system compared to autofocus. Not the correct terminology, I know, but is the best descriptor I can use. IAC, I suspect we agree that a system where the photographer decides what is to be focused on is best. If we cannot have a system that will work to maintain focus (no matter where the focus point goes afterwards) once the lock is enabled, then present systems are the best we can hope for. Herb - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 3:49 PM Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Herb Chong wrote: you obviously haven't done any lately then. even the *istD locks onto flying birds. and it's one of the slowest out there nowadays at continuous AF. That's not the same as locking on.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
the Nikon and Canon cameras can track an object wandering across the FOV once it has acquired focus once, you don't even have to keep it on the same sensor. that's part of the reason the Canon 1Ds Mk2 has so many sensors. Herb... - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 9:49 AM Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) But _as Jens said_ it is not the same as locking on in weaponry, which is an active system compared to autofocus. Not the correct terminology, I know, but is the best descriptor I can use. IAC, I suspect we agree that a system where the photographer decides what is to be focused on is best. If we cannot have a system that will work to maintain focus (no matter where the focus point goes afterwards) once the lock is enabled, then present systems are the best we can hope for.
RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
I handled one of the very first five Canon D1's, when they first came to Europe (2001?) at a Canon presentation in Cork, Ireland. It had 45 focus points. The viewfinder was totally covered with focus points - they lit up like the neon lights of Las Vegas, when the camera was moved. The focus changed as fast as I could move the camera. And it took 4-8 frames every time I pressed the shutter (8 fps). It sounded like a freaking Uzi! Now, that's fast AF. Pentax never made anything close to that. Comparing this Canon to the *ist D is like comparing a Saab 9-3 to a Lamborghini Gallardo. Saab still make very nice cars, even though they are perhaps not the state of the art. The same goes for the Pentax *ist D, I suppose. About locking onto something: To me this means focusing on a subject, then stay focused at the same subject, even if it moves. No camera that I know of does this. Not even the Canon D1. Cameras loose focus when things move, but may refocus at the same subject after a while. Or it may focus on something else! That's not locking onto a subject, is it? Tracking perhaps, but certainly not locking. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: Herb Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 16. januar 2005 00:04 Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Emne: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) the Nikon and Canon cameras can track an object wandering across the FOV once it has acquired focus once, you don't even have to keep it on the same sensor. that's part of the reason the Canon 1Ds Mk2 has so many sensors. Herb... - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 9:49 AM Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) But _as Jens said_ it is not the same as locking on in weaponry, which is an active system compared to autofocus. Not the correct terminology, I know, but is the best descriptor I can use. IAC, I suspect we agree that a system where the photographer decides what is to be focused on is best. If we cannot have a system that will work to maintain focus (no matter where the focus point goes afterwards) once the lock is enabled, then present systems are the best we can hope for.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
tracking and locking are the same thing in most manufacturer's literature. Herb - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 6:43 PM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) About locking onto something: To me this means focusing on a subject, then stay focused at the same subject, even if it moves. No camera that I know of does this. Not even the Canon D1. Cameras loose focus when things move, but may refocus at the same subject after a while. Or it may focus on something else! That's not locking onto a subject, is it? Tracking perhaps, but certainly not locking.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Herb Chong wrote: you obviously haven't done any lately then. even the *istD locks onto flying birds. and it's one of the slowest out there nowadays at continuous AF. That's not the same as locking on. Herb... - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 5:50 PM Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) In any case, I suspect Jens is saying that locking on in (autofocus) photography is not the same as locking on using guided weaponry. In other words, the weaponry will stay locked on to its target unless drastic countermeasures are undertaken. Cameras will change focus if the photographer breathes.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
you're deliberately conflating two entirely different field's terminologies to make your point, just like JCO's pointless argument that no lens can possibly show anything 3D because the imaging surface is a flat plane. locking on in autofocus cameras means what i said. Herb - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 3:49 PM Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Herb Chong wrote: you obviously haven't done any lately then. even the *istD locks onto flying birds. and it's one of the slowest out there nowadays at continuous AF. That's not the same as locking on.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Hi, Herb Chong wrote: the February Popular Photography Your Best Shot column reproduces a USAF photo of a pilot ejecting from his F-16 as the plane was coming straight at the photographer. the camera locked onto the front of the airplane as it flew directly toward and then crashed to a stop about 100 feet from the photographer. it allowed him to take an in-focus image as it moved. the article captions says that the camera was a Nikon D1X, not noted for its AF speed, on a 300/2.8. figure the aircraft was travelling a couple of hundred miles an hour. http://www.rapp.org/archives/2004/01/thunderbird_crash/ Not a very good example at all. The photographer was almost certainly expecting the plane to be there (though maybe not doing _that_) and there is also a luck factor involved. There is also the good old English word bollocks to consider. In any case, I suspect Jens is saying that locking on in (autofocus) photography is not the same as locking on using guided weaponry. In other words, the weaponry will stay locked on to its target unless drastic countermeasures are undertaken. Cameras will change focus if the photographer breathes. mike Herb - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 2:19 AM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Cameras cannot lock on to anything. Like an electronic weapon system in an F18-Hornet. I wish it could. It can only focus on a subject/distance. Then perhaps refocus on annother subject/distance.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
you obviously haven't done any lately then. even the *istD locks onto flying birds. and it's one of the slowest out there nowadays at continuous AF. Herb... - Original Message - From: mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 5:50 PM Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) In any case, I suspect Jens is saying that locking on in (autofocus) photography is not the same as locking on using guided weaponry. In other words, the weaponry will stay locked on to its target unless drastic countermeasures are undertaken. Cameras will change focus if the photographer breathes.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
why not? they are the same principle as optical target acquisition in a missile weapon system. not as smart, to be sure, but there is a human in back making sure that the camera is aimed at the target. Herb... - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 2:19 AM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Cameras cannot lock on to anything. Like an electronic weapon system in an F18-Hornet. I wish it could. It can only focus on a subject/distance. Then perhaps refocus on annother subject/distance.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
the February Popular Photography Your Best Shot column reproduces a USAF photo of a pilot ejecting from his F-16 as the plane was coming straight at the photographer. the camera locked onto the front of the airplane as it flew directly toward and then crashed to a stop about 100 feet from the photographer. it allowed him to take an in-focus image as it moved. the article captions says that the camera was a Nikon D1X, not noted for its AF speed, on a 300/2.8. figure the aircraft was travelling a couple of hundred miles an hour. http://www.rapp.org/archives/2004/01/thunderbird_crash/ Herb - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 2:19 AM Subject: RE: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments) Cameras cannot lock on to anything. Like an electronic weapon system in an F18-Hornet. I wish it could. It can only focus on a subject/distance. Then perhaps refocus on annother subject/distance.
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
On 2005-01-11, at 00:47, John Coyle wrote: My experience with the AF of the MZ-S and the *istD tells me that the MZ-S is far better than the digital, with any of the lens I have used on both cameras. I find the MZ-S very quick and accurate, and able to AF in very dim conditions and low contrast. On the other hand, using the *istD at a wedding on Saturday, I got only two focussed shots in a 6-7 second opportunity (when the couple were walking back down the aisle after the ceremony) using AF-C and the SMC-Takumar 28-105 4-5.6: sensitivity 400ASA and exposures were in the 1/60 @ 4.5 to1/90 @ 5.6 region. I have to confess that this is my first real disappointment with the *istD: perhaps, however, it was due to battery state, as I did get the half-full to empty warning several times during about an hour's use - turning it off and back on again gave me a full indicator every time though! Alternatively, the state of the batteries together with the fact that this is a solid and heavy lens may have contributed. This is exactly the same experience as mine. And that was a reason why I had to sell *istD - disappointment during weddings at low light. For film use I still have MZ-S, which has very good (enough for action shots during wedding) low-light AF. -- Best regards Sylwek
Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Boy, you have me confused. I have shot a lot of weddings, and I don't recall action shots being a part of it. If you can't focus follow someone walking down the aisle, then perhaps you might consider that action. I never use AF for weddings. -- Best regards, Bruce Tuesday, January 11, 2005, 2:26:19 AM, you wrote: SP On 2005-01-11, at 00:47, John Coyle wrote: My experience with the AF of the MZ-S and the *istD tells me that the MZ-S is far better than the digital, with any of the lens I have used on both cameras. I find the MZ-S very quick and accurate, and able to AF in very dim conditions and low contrast. On the other hand, using the *istD at a wedding on Saturday, I got only two focussed shots in a 6-7 second opportunity (when the couple were walking back down the aisle after the ceremony) using AF-C and the SMC-Takumar 28-105 4-5.6: sensitivity 400ASA and exposures were in the 1/60 @ 4.5 to1/90 @ 5.6 region. I have to confess that this is my first real disappointment with the *istD: perhaps, however, it was due to battery state, as I did get the half-full to empty warning several times during about an hour's use - turning it off and back on again gave me a full indicator every time though! Alternatively, the state of the batteries together with the fact that this is a solid and heavy lens may have contributed. SP This is exactly the same experience as mine. And that was a reason why SP I had to sell *istD - disappointment during weddings at low light. For SP film use I still have MZ-S, which has very good (enough for action SP shots during wedding) low-light AF. SP -- SP Best regards SP Sylwek
