To illustrate my previoulsly stated point, I made some 3-shit sereies to test the AF of the *ist D. Using continous AF and multiple exposure setting and a FA 2.8/80-200mm ED(IF). Technique - Point press the shutter and keep it pressed down for 3 exposures.
Is this the fast and accurrate AF-performance a pro photographer or a dedicated amateur photographer is looking for in a 1500 USD camera: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72057594048128913/ The car was driving very slowly, looking for a parking space. The young lad was walking normally and the girl on the bicycle was riding rather slow, having just been on her mobile phone. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. januar 2006 10:19 Til: [email protected] Emne: RE: new AF system soon (when D2 arrives)? Adam wrote <different one can cause problems for you at certain events, like studio <shoots, when you can't take advantage of gear sharing). My *ist D works perfectly normal with an Elinchrome strobe outfit. No problems. Some flash units requires, that some cameras (not just Pentax) are connected after reversing the polarity of the flash cord. That's not a real problem. Easily solved, and invovleves several camera brands. My camera club just invested in an extra cord, so the members can choose the right cord for the right camera. Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Adam Maas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. januar 2006 06:59 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: new AF system soon (when D2 arrives)? John Francis wrote: >On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 04:54:14PM +0100, Jens Bladt wrote: > > >>P?l, have you tried to shoot into a group of people, vehicles, animals etc. >>that are moving with the D? >>Nothing good will come of it - even with a F. 2.8 lens. >>Sports photography is simply off limits using a *ist D, IMO. >>The AF is too slow and FPS is insufficient >> >> > >I'm sure that will come as a surprise to those amongst us doing >sports photography with a D - apparently we must be hallucinating. > >The buffer size is a limitation - I have lost shots because the >camera is still writing out earlier images. But I've been able >to use AF, even with big, heavy lenses. > >Not that there isn't considerable room for improvement; I don't >agree with the posters who suggest even cameras such as the MZ-S >can auto-focus as well as competitive bodies such as the 20D with >USM lenses. I've used Pentax, Nikon & Canon bodies at events, >and I'm firmly convinced that the Pentax AF is neither as fast >nor as reliable as the competition; if my livelihood depended on >my ability to bring home the results I would have switched by now. >But to suggest auto-focus is unusable is overstating the case. > > > I agree entirely. Heck, one can shoot sport without AF at all. I shot a soccer game last fall with a 200/f4 XR Rikenon and the D, quite successfully. And that was a bunch of hyperactive 11 year olds. But There is a major performance gap, and it's one reason I've left Pentax for AF/Digital bodies. Not the main reason though (That was logistics. When everyone in the club shoots one brand, having a different one can cause problems for you at certain events, like studio shoots, when you can't take advantage of gear sharing). -Adam
