K-5 IIs does indeed have a better AF. I have three lenses which is now working as they should.
My FA*400/5,6 would not focus correctly at all on the three or four K-5 I tried. But it was working on K-7, K10D and *istDS and it is working as it should on K-5 IIs. My FA*80-200 was very difficult to use on K-5. I would guess 1/3 of the pictures was back focused and 1/3 front focused. And my lens needed +8 on AF adjustment at 200mm and +2 at 80mm. On the K-5 IIs, focus is spot on every time. And no adjustment is needed. And my DA*55 is a lot more consistent with K-5 IIs. It was usable on K-5, but quite a lot of the pictures was either front or back focusing. So I am happy with the upgrade. Maybe this is what K-5 should be in the first place, but it wasn't. Upgrading to K-5 IIs has given me at least two lenses back. Stig Vidar Hovland -----Original Message----- From: PDML [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Miserere Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 3:05 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Pixel-peeping madness I've NEVER bought a camera based on pixel-peeping (in fact, I've even done the opposite and bought a camera that was pretty bad when pixel-peeped), and I agree with you, Rob, that I would only choose the K-5II(s) if its AF were better than the K-5's, given the great price of the K-5 right now. I still suspect Pentax have a new flagship up their sleeve that will be released shortly for $1,600 - 1,800. Releasing the K-5II was easy, involved minimal R&D, and they could say "look, we did release a new camera at Photokina...TWO new cameras, in fact." Cheers, -M. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
