That should be 11 sensor points...
On 1/8/2017 10:40 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
The AF in the K-5II is pretty good. It still has the same fairly
large sensor points and only 9 of them, like the original K-5, but
it's snappy and mostly correct, if you don't expect perfect eyelash
focus. It will choose the eye brow most of the time, seems to favor
the closest thing the focus point is over.
I've never shot with a K-7 or K-3, came to the K-5II from the K20D,
and my first and lasting impression is finally Pentax AF that mostly
works.
Everything I've read implies that the K-5II[s] focusing system is much
superior to the original K-5, pretty much the equal of the K-3 with
less fine control since the K-3 packs two and a half times the number
of focus points into the same area.
Most reviews of the K-1 focus system seem to think that in spite of
being on par with or maybe a bit better than the K-3, the focus points
are too concentrated in the center of the frame, for a lot of purposes.
That's not surprising as I expect the footprint of the K-1 focusing
module is exactly the same as the K-3[II], and some version of it will
find itself in the next iteration of the APS-C flagship, if Ricoh
decides to keep producing a semi pro APS-C body.
On 1/8/2017 4:04 PM, Gonz wrote:
Question: How is the K-1 autofocus, as compared to say, a K-5? I was
looking through a batch of pictures I took recently at a family
gathering and was appalled by the autofocus performance. Many of the
shots were off, lost forever. So bad that I started looking at other
systems like Nikon D500, etc, which reviewers say is on par with their
flagship D5.
I just don't want to invest in a 2K camera if they haven't at least
made this essential (to my tired old eyes) part work much better. No
matter that I have $$$$ tied up in so many Pentax lenses.
--
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.
