Re: An odd K-5 problem

I have been thinking of posting a related question. When you determine the per lens focus adjustment for a lens on one camera, does that number tend to work on another camera, perhaps with a slight offset. For example if on camera 1 you have lens A +5 lens B +2 lens C -1 would you use the

Re: An odd K-5 problem

The adjustments would only be similar if the two cameras were absolutely the same. Tolerances will be different from body to body and lens to lens, so you'd want to calibrate each lens to each body. On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > I have been thinking of

Re: An odd K-5 problem

Rick, my 16-45 seems soft on my K-5 and k10d but it was very good on my istd. Still confused over this. Dave On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Rick Womer wrote: > I am trying to sort out soft focus on my K-5 (especially with my 16-45/4 > lens), and would appreciate some

Re: An odd K-5 problem

On 3/18/2016 9:01 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: David J Brooks wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Bill wrote: Gentlemen, remember that with the K5, the AF accuracy can be thrown off tremendously by the colour of the subject. Sort of the Donald Trump of cameras

Re: An odd K-5 problem

I had one of the K5s that was so out of spec that nothing could fix the AF. I did the software upgrades, hoping that they would fix the AF, but it turns out the hardware was too flaky. Mine was so bad that even in broad daylight, the AF would vary depending on the subject matter. The only way I

Re: An odd K-5 problem

I have a hell of a time getting a decent shot from live view so no thoughts on your problem here. Dave On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Rick Womer wrote: > The strangest things about these AF experiments are: > > 1. Front-focusing on LiveView, which (I thought) sought to

Re: An odd K-5 problem

Well, I have done a good deal of web research and experimentation. First, and most importantly, since I use the viewfinder for 99+ percent of my shooting, I adjusted the AF for the viewfinder for my three most-used lenses (16-45, 40 Ltd, 50-200). It is much better, thank you. Second, the K-5

Re: An odd K-5 problem

Rick, I am not sure. I can speculate that the difference could come from: 1) method of AF (isn't it different from LV and through viewfinder, - I forgot how it is for K5/K3). 2) number of sensor points used in the two cases. Also, Bill (or somebody else?) mentioned in this thread that some

Re: An odd K-5 problem

On 3/18/2016 1:51 AM, Larry Colen wrote: Bill wrote: Gentlemen, remember that with the K5, the AF accuracy can be thrown off tremendously by the colour of the subject. The AF on the K5 is like a whore turning her first trick. It hasn't yet become jaded and bored by the whole process?

Re: An odd K-5 problem

That's what's nice about the K-5II it's Pentax Auto Focus that mostly works. Mostly. On 3/18/2016 8:22 AM, Bill wrote: On 3/18/2016 1:51 AM, Larry Colen wrote: Bill wrote: Gentlemen, remember that with the K5, the AF accuracy can be thrown off tremendously by the colour of the subject.

Re: An odd K-5 problem

Bill wrote: Gentlemen, remember that with the K5, the AF accuracy can be thrown off tremendously by the colour of the subject. The AF on the K5 is like a whore turning her first trick. It hasn't yet become jaded and bored by the whole process? -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox

Re: An odd K-5 problem

I noticed similar with my 16-45 and K-5. It was my favorite lens on my K100D Super, and on the K-5, it lost it's luster. Most likely due to the extra 10 megapixels to see the flaws, and it makes a tripod even more critical for clean shots. On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:47 PM, David J Brooks

Re: An odd K-5 problem

MARK! Bill wrote on Thu Mar 17 23:36:51 EDT 2016: The AF on the K5 is like a whore turning her first trick. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the

Re: An odd K-5 problem

Gentlemen, remember that with the K5, the AF accuracy can be thrown off tremendously by the colour of the subject. The AF on the K5 is like a whore turning her first trick. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the

Re: An odd K-5 problem

Larry, I do not know what is _typical_ for different Pentax cameras and lenses, but from the general point of view, I fully agree with what David wrote. Think about it this way: you have a set of deviation parameters for the camera C1= {c1, c2, c3,c4, c5... }, and then a set of "coupled"

Re: An odd K-5 problem

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Bill wrote: > Gentlemen, remember that with the K5, the AF accuracy can be thrown off > tremendously by the colour of the subject. Sort of the Donald Trump of cameras then Dave > The AF on the K5 is like a whore turning her first

Re: An odd K-5 problem

The strangest things about these AF experiments are: 1. Front-focusing on LiveView, which (I thought) sought to maximize the contrast of the image on the sensor, and thus should be IN FOCUS regardless of the lens in use; and 2. The 16-45 front-focusing with LiveView, and back-focusing with

Re: An odd K-5 problem

On 3/18/2016 8:23 AM, Bill wrote: On 3/18/2016 9:01 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: David J Brooks wrote: On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Bill wrote: Gentlemen, remember that with the K5, the AF accuracy can be thrown off tremendously by the colour of the subject.

Re: An odd K-5 problem

David J Brooks wrote: >On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Bill wrote: >> Gentlemen, remember that with the K5, the AF accuracy can be thrown off >> tremendously by the colour of the subject. > >Sort of the Donald Trump of cameras then Mark! ;-) -- Mark Roberts -