While there is a considerable learning curve to fully utilize some of the AF improvements offered by the K-3 Mark III, the advances over older Pentax models are significant and matter in real-life shooting. Actual long-term users of the Mark III have known or at least suspected this for quite a while now. Still, as something to show the distractors and measurebaters (not that they will necessarily be moved, I should think), or perhaps more importantly, potential buyers of the APS-C flagship, your video certainly has some value. After using the Mark III for nearly eight months now, I will say that it is an improvement in so many respects over the Mark I from which I came that only talking about the autofocus doesn't do justice at all to what the Ricoh engineers and designers have achieved with the Mark III. I still see myself inwardly smiling whenever I pick up this amazing camera, and its images surely deliver the goods. Thanks for putting this out, Kobie.
Yeah the AF of the K-3 III really is amazing but I would still love to see a FW update wich improves things like subject detection in OVF and first of all AF in video mode! (Tracking and Face Detection)
I have found the that the K3iii is in a different league when it comes to shooting animals through grass. On my mk2 the camera would always get confused and focus of the grass. The K3iii just seems to know what the subject is, where I found the mk2 was just guessing.
Thank you very much for the comparison. In any case, the speed, as seen in most cases, depends on the speed of the lens to focus, it would be more interesting to see if the focus of the MKIII has improvements in difficult contrast and light situations. Screw autofocuses can be faster than those of lenses with an internal motor, but that generally happened with the older generations. Today they cannot compete with the most modern lenses, so the most interesting thing would perhaps not be to see the focusing speed for sports or action photography, but the ability to focus more and better.
@KobieMC ah I didn't think about the built in motor, I'm still new to screwdrive. The 100mm macro is my favourite screwdrive, very underrated lens in my opinion.
I sure don't miss trying to shoot macro without you a fully articulated screen 😂 I'm hopeful the K1iii evolves to be more like the Kf. If it includes D780/90D/6Dii style phase detection AF in live view, I'll buy it in a heartbeat. This is mildly interesting from a Pentax centric perspective. It would be interesting to see if the K3iii keeps up with the D780. I know the 90D was equivalent for ovf and dramatically superior for live view. I keep swapping around trying to find the best option to share lenses between film and digital. Cheers
I have a KP and a K3iii, both great machines. I find the K3iii faster on AF, but more importantly the KP will sometimes just lose focus if the subject is moving, which rarely happens with the K3iii.
Kobie, is very interested in the topic of using Pentax optics while maintaining autofocus on modern mirrorless Nikon Z and Sony E systems. Is there an opportunity to share your thoughts or experiences?
Kobie I have the Pentax K3-11 and the K3 Mark111 The build quality on both cameras exceptional. Hands down the K3Mark111 is a better camera it has better low light performance, better wildlife performance photographing birds I flight . The K3-11 is no slouch for general photography and as a back up camera I choose to take it for a week trip to Chicago I photographed most of the city sites with the camera I did not need fast autofocus it's low light performance is good enough. If something happens to the camera ( dropped or stolen) it's not as big of a loss as it would be with Pentax K3 Mark III
Aren't lenses with internal drive unaffected by what body is attached? Their speed is fixed internally. There might be some speed difference caused by communication with the body, for example, one body recognizes focus faster than the other and signals the lens ... but it looks like that's not a key factor based on motored lens results. The screw drives move with the camera's motor so speeding that up is significant. Anyway, great piece that deserves to be expanded... K3iii vs ?
I believe (if it's the same concept of data communication in vehicles) it's based on voltage/amperage. If you can run more voltage through the cables, the communication will be faster this driving the lens sooner and locking focus faster. Plus the K-3 III has a larger focus sensor which will also help with speed regarding which way to start driving the lens so it's more decisive and takes less time to lock focus.
@KobieMC That effect of electronics performance seems minimal at best, based on your results. I'm guessing those who think the K3iii isn't much faster are most likely using SDM/DC/PLM lenses. I have probably 60% screw drives lenses and I do notice a big difference with those. I'm not noticing, in your results, camera applied voltage translating into faster lens motor action. Not significantly anyway. Anything under 5-10% is probably not noticeable to the user.
I've never heard that. Older SDM lenses are known to have "weak" AF motors that eventually stop functioning of the lens isn't used regularly. But I've never heard of the K-3 III killing lens AF motors.
@@toke7560 That doesn't make sense. The FA 43 is a screw driven lens, the focusing is don't buy the camera body, the lens has no focus motor. The 16-50 SDM is known for a weak motor regardless of which pentax body is being used. People have converted that lens to screw drive via firmware after an SDM failure and have had no further issues. So, I'm not sure who wrote what you read, but there seems to be something missing in context, maybe the person who wrote it didn't explain it well?
@@toke7560 yes, which is a known SDM issue regardless if it's a K-1, K-S1/2, K-70/KF, KP, K-3/II or K-3 III. It's a weak motor inside the lens itself. I have never heard of a screw driven lens dying since there's no AF motor in the lens.
I think the pseudoscientific test is incomplete (or did i miss it?) we had K3-3 PLM vs. k3 SDM and K3-3 PLM vs K3 DC but i miss the viceversa K3-3 SDM vs K3 PLM and K3-3 DC vs K3 PLM, also the K3-3 SDM vs. K3 DC and the K3-3 DC vs. K3 SDM. Of course the direct comparison of two identical lenses (PLM. DC and SDM) would have beent the optimal test arrangement, but nobody has a spare of each lens laying around, and even then there might be differences between the samples.
The first test was the screw drive 100 macro WR on each camera. Then the DC 18-135 on each camera, then PLM on each camera. Then, I used the slowest focusing lens (due to very long focus throw) on the K-3 III vs the fastest PLM motor lens on the K-3. The screw drive focused and shot just as fast on the K-3 III as the PLM (fastest focusing motor) did in the K-3.
I just bought a Pentax KF this week and I can tell the KF focuses better than my previous K-70. My KF outperforms my Olympus EM10 IV and my Panasonic G95 in terms of picture quality, so I am very happy to get back into Pentax once again. I always leave Pentax, then regret it and buy back into the system. I get frustarted that Pentax won't offer a mirrorless camera or at least let me shoot the K70 or KF like I would a mirrorless camera. In Mirror Lock Up mode on my KF, the screen goes blank instead of remaining operational. If Pentax kept the LV mode screen on and just let me press the shutter, it would allow me to shoot mirrorless-like on my Pentax - SIGH. I live in Canada and the Pentax, unlike many other cameras on the market, allows me to shoot in the winter because it can operate below zero and many of the lenses are weather sealed. Pentax cameras have superb dynamic range and colour depth and i think that is why they produce such great photos. If Pentax introduced a mirrorless option, they would dominate the photography market. Look at the GR 3 - it totally dominates it's category.
I totally agree with you in had aperture block failure on two Pentax K50's and my K70 I had the K70 repaired and it works fine now. I choose to buy a used K3-11 from KEH camera in three years I have had no problems with the camera. I used it on a week hiking trip in the California Redwoods and a month in Europe as well as a week trip to Chicago
From the start, when I hear that we’re going to measure autofocus speed, the comparison seems pointless. Different cameras have different motors for focusing, and the quality, consistency, and precision of focus don’t just depend on motor speed. For example, I have two lenses on my Pentax K3ii: the DA 15mm Limited and the HD DA* 11-18mm WR. The 11-18mm lens actually focuses slower; the older 15mm Limited lens reaches focus from one extreme to the other faster than the newer 11-18mm. However, with the older lens, the camera typically reaches an approximate focus point and then needs two to three micro-adjustments, while the 11-18mm usually locks focus in one step and holds it there. In practice, the 11-18mm is much faster, more precise, consistent, and more useful. Although a synthetic test might show the older DA 15mm Limited as faster in moving from point to point, this doesn’t reflect real-world performance. When I think about my Sigma 18-35mm Art lens, which is relatively slow in moving focus through the entire range, it’s also quite slow when focusing on a person or object. However, this slowness has never really bothered me. What does bother me is the lack of accuracy: constant shifts in focus points, micro-adjustments, and, in the end, focus isn’t where it should be. This means I have to constantly check each shot to see if the focus is correct, which is frustrating, especially when the person is waiting - “just a bit longer, let’s try one more time.” Eventually, I get tired of this and switch to live view. In live view mode, the focus is spot-on, even if it takes longer than phase-detection autofocus, since live view (contrast-detection autofocus) is almost always precise. In practice, this means shooting in live view mode is faster and more efficient than focusing through the viewfinder, no matter how fast the lens or camera can move the focus from one end to the other. That speed is simply irrelevant. I don't understand why there would be any difference in focusing speed between one camera and another if the focusing is handled by the lens itself (this applies to both DC and PLM motors). Furthermore, it seems you’re using different lenses across the cameras. How can the results be comparable if the same lens isn’t used on both cameras? To ensure a fair comparison, you would need to use the exact same lens on both cameras, as even two identical lenses may not be perfectly the same. As mentioned, focusing speed is absolutely irrelevant. Unfortunately, I haven’t had the chance to test the K-3 Mark III at a wedding, where I mainly use the K-5 Mark II and the K-3 Mark II, which are somewhat comparable. Before that, I used the K-r, which was far behind, especially under artificial lighting. With Pentax, it’s never been about speed but always about accuracy-and the frustration of not knowing if the focus is exactly where it should be. Pentax often avoids focusing on faces, as if faces were "contagious," opting instead to focus on the background if possible. With live view mode, these frustrations disappear, speed aside. Once I realized this, I started shooting 90% of a wedding in live view. Although it has its limitations, the results count. And, of course, there’s no subject tracking; with Pentax, it’s either unreliable or doesn’t work at all.
I started with the same lens on each camera. D FA 100mm Macro, then DC 18-135 WR, then 55-300 PLM. I then took the slowest focusing lens due to the long focus throw and mounted that to the K-3 III and the fastest focusing lens (55-300 PLM) mounted to the K-3. Both lenses were set to minimum focus distance and the subject was basically at infinity focus. Both cameras were set to focus priority. The K-3 III with the macro lens focused just as fast as the PLM on the K-3. I figured that was sufficient enough to show there's been improvements. I did state in the video, that I didn't do one lens on each body over and over for this video. But, if people are willing to watch an "extended version". I'll happily do one.
@@KobieMC the real elephant in the room is how to focus actually perform on real world. And speed was not an issue even on KR, let alone K5ii. I see only slight improvement on K3ii, regardting speed. The real difference between those three cameras are in accuracy. K5 Mark II significantly improved keeper rate under artificial light. Wild k3 improved how robust the autofocus is in low light. In great light both cameras are in same ballpark. I see greatest improvement between old screwdriver lenses and most recent modern Pentax lenses. But focusing in live view is next level accuracy compared to phase detection. And when I working I only look how accurate how fast or how easy I can achieve Focus. I tested pentax kp: camera was really snappy and fast. Level of Keepers was my worst. 50% of images we're focused wrongly. With k32 which uses the same out of focus model but not tweaked, my keeper was around 80 to 90. And very same with k5 ii, which I use in parallel. I really can't find difference between those two cameras despite on paper k3 ought to have improved autofocus. Yes more Focus points and better decision in low light. For Pentax k-3 Mark III there is really no use if its 20, 30, 40% faster in Focus motor, but the result would be missed Focus.
If you’ve got that continuous micro-adjustment thing, I have noticed that with AF-C and shooting static or slow moving subjects. For me it seems worse with longer screw drive lenses (70-210-ish for instance). An easy fix (again, for me) was to switch to AF-S in those situations. It also seems to be way less of an issue with a DC or PLM lens (sorry, don’t have an SDM to test with), so swapping to the 55-300PLM or 70-200DC was another easy fix.
@@robvandenbrink9006 yes, AF-C continuously does micro adjustments on static objects. And switching to AF-S prevents that. But that does not mean auto focus is acquired properly in AF-S. I am used to use static auto focus and half-press shutter repeatedly, until AF stop moving, then I take a shot. But I figured out that all this Jiu-Jitsu with autofocus takes very much longer than if I just use live view and use contrast detection do the focus once and just take one shot and it's done.
I have two K1 mk2s and two K3 mk3s. They fulfill my needs. If they didn't, I would get rid of them. I got caught in the measurebaters trap back in the film days. Around the time that most people scanned negatives to get a digital copy. Blather and BS and lots of hurt feelings and pompous posturing. If the camera works for you, use it. Otherwise trade or sell it away and get something more your liking. I doubt that many common photogrpaphs have the test equipment and laboratory to make an objective 'dive'. This is just a very subjective blow of nonsensical hot air. Congrats though, my first thumbs down!
Hi guys! Can´t believe got mine here in a box ready to be opened!!! Regards from Spain!
While there is a considerable learning curve to fully utilize some of the AF improvements offered by the K-3 Mark III, the advances over older Pentax models are significant and matter in real-life shooting. Actual long-term users of the Mark III have known or at least suspected this for quite a while now. Still, as something to show the distractors and measurebaters (not that they will necessarily be moved, I should think), or perhaps more importantly, potential buyers of the APS-C flagship, your video certainly has some value. After using the Mark III for nearly eight months now, I will say that it is an improvement in so many respects over the Mark I from which I came that only talking about the autofocus doesn't do justice at all to what the Ricoh engineers and designers have achieved with the Mark III. I still see myself inwardly smiling whenever I pick up this amazing camera, and its images surely deliver the goods. Thanks for putting this out, Kobie.
Yeah the AF of the K-3 III really is amazing but I would still love to see a FW update wich improves things like subject detection in OVF and first of all AF in video mode! (Tracking and Face Detection)
I have found the that the K3iii is in a different league when it comes to shooting animals through grass. On my mk2 the camera would always get confused and focus of the grass. The K3iii just seems to know what the subject is, where I found the mk2 was just guessing.
Thank you very much for the comparison. In any case, the speed, as seen in most cases, depends on the speed of the lens to focus, it would be more interesting to see if the focus of the MKIII has improvements in difficult contrast and light situations. Screw autofocuses can be faster than those of lenses with an internal motor, but that generally happened with the older generations. Today they cannot compete with the most modern lenses, so the most interesting thing would perhaps not be to see the focusing speed for sports or action photography, but the ability to focus more and better.
Very interesting, I wouldn't have thought the screwdrive to be so different in speed. You'd think the same battery would set a specific speed.
@@i.like.pixels Most likely a motor upgrade in the K-3 III and the larger AF sensor helps as well.
@KobieMC ah I didn't think about the built in motor, I'm still new to screwdrive. The 100mm macro is my favourite screwdrive, very underrated lens in my opinion.
@@i.like.pixels Welcome to your new wiiiiirld (making screw drive sounds lol).
I sure don't miss trying to shoot macro without you a fully articulated screen 😂
I'm hopeful the K1iii evolves to be more like the Kf. If it includes D780/90D/6Dii style phase detection AF in live view, I'll buy it in a heartbeat.
This is mildly interesting from a Pentax centric perspective. It would be interesting to see if the K3iii keeps up with the D780. I know the 90D was equivalent for ovf and dramatically superior for live view. I keep swapping around trying to find the best option to share lenses between film and digital.
Cheers
Doesn't look like much difference in speed, but sure feels better than that on my K3-III when photographing birds.
I have a KP and a K3iii, both great machines. I find the K3iii faster on AF, but more importantly the KP will sometimes just lose focus if the subject is moving, which rarely happens with the K3iii.
Kobie, is very interested in the topic of using Pentax optics while maintaining autofocus on modern mirrorless Nikon Z and Sony E systems. Is there an opportunity to share your thoughts or experiences?
Unfortunately, I don't have access to a Nikon Z or Sony E mount camera or AF K mount to Z or E lens adapter.
Kobie
I have the Pentax K3-11 and the K3 Mark111 The build quality on both cameras exceptional. Hands down the K3Mark111 is a better camera it has better low light performance, better wildlife performance photographing birds I flight . The K3-11 is no slouch for general photography and as a back up camera I choose to take it for a week trip to Chicago I photographed most of the city sites with the camera I did not need fast autofocus it's low light performance is good enough. If something happens to the camera ( dropped or stolen) it's not as big of a loss as it would be with Pentax K3 Mark III
Aren't lenses with internal drive unaffected by what body is attached? Their speed is fixed internally. There might be some speed difference caused by communication with the body, for example, one body recognizes focus faster than the other and signals the lens ... but it looks like that's not a key factor based on motored lens results. The screw drives move with the camera's motor so speeding that up is significant. Anyway, great piece that deserves to be expanded... K3iii vs ?
I believe (if it's the same concept of data communication in vehicles) it's based on voltage/amperage. If you can run more voltage through the cables, the communication will be faster this driving the lens sooner and locking focus faster. Plus the K-3 III has a larger focus sensor which will also help with speed regarding which way to start driving the lens so it's more decisive and takes less time to lock focus.
@KobieMC That effect of electronics performance seems minimal at best, based on your results. I'm guessing those who think the K3iii isn't much faster are most likely using SDM/DC/PLM lenses. I have probably 60% screw drives lenses and I do notice a big difference with those. I'm not noticing, in your results, camera applied voltage translating into faster lens motor action. Not significantly anyway. Anything under 5-10% is probably not noticeable to the user.
@tonyzoc1 When it comes to tracking it's very noticeable.
I've read that the fast focusing of this camera is blowing the motors of lenses.
I've never heard that. Older SDM lenses are known to have "weak" AF motors that eventually stop functioning of the lens isn't used regularly. But I've never heard of the K-3 III killing lens AF motors.
@@KobieMC I read it today somewhere on the internet. Especially the FA 43mm. and 16-50mm.
@@toke7560 That doesn't make sense. The FA 43 is a screw driven lens, the focusing is don't buy the camera body, the lens has no focus motor. The 16-50 SDM is known for a weak motor regardless of which pentax body is being used. People have converted that lens to screw drive via firmware after an SDM failure and have had no further issues. So, I'm not sure who wrote what you read, but there seems to be something missing in context, maybe the person who wrote it didn't explain it well?
@@KobieMC not really sure. Something about the gears being weak.
@@toke7560 yes, which is a known SDM issue regardless if it's a K-1, K-S1/2, K-70/KF, KP, K-3/II or K-3 III. It's a weak motor inside the lens itself. I have never heard of a screw driven lens dying since there's no AF motor in the lens.
Were the batteries fully charged when each test was performed? (Was the same battery used?)
Both batteries were full and new official Pentax batteries.
@@KobieMC Just eliminating a potential (pun intended) variable. 😂
I saw the speed difference in low light sports photography. Really low light. The K3 III blew away the K3 II and K1 II. It’s amazing hardware.
I think the pseudoscientific test is incomplete (or did i miss it?) we had K3-3 PLM vs. k3 SDM and K3-3 PLM vs K3 DC but i miss the viceversa K3-3 SDM vs K3 PLM and K3-3 DC vs K3 PLM, also the K3-3 SDM vs. K3 DC and the K3-3 DC vs. K3 SDM. Of course the direct comparison of two identical lenses (PLM. DC and SDM) would have beent the optimal test arrangement, but nobody has a spare of each lens laying around, and even then there might be differences between the samples.
The first test was the screw drive 100 macro WR on each camera. Then the DC 18-135 on each camera, then PLM on each camera. Then, I used the slowest focusing lens (due to very long focus throw) on the K-3 III vs the fastest PLM motor lens on the K-3. The screw drive focused and shot just as fast on the K-3 III as the PLM (fastest focusing motor) did in the K-3.
I just bought a Pentax KF this week and I can tell the KF focuses better than my previous K-70. My KF outperforms my Olympus EM10 IV and my Panasonic G95 in terms of picture quality, so I am very happy to get back into Pentax once again. I always leave Pentax, then regret it and buy back into the system. I get frustarted that Pentax won't offer a mirrorless camera or at least let me shoot the K70 or KF like I would a mirrorless camera. In Mirror Lock Up mode on my KF, the screen goes blank instead of remaining operational. If Pentax kept the LV mode screen on and just let me press the shutter, it would allow me to shoot mirrorless-like on my Pentax - SIGH. I live in Canada and the Pentax, unlike many other cameras on the market, allows me to shoot in the winter because it can operate below zero and many of the lenses are weather sealed. Pentax cameras have superb dynamic range and colour depth and i think that is why they produce such great photos. If Pentax introduced a mirrorless option, they would dominate the photography market. Look at the GR 3 - it totally dominates it's category.
I totally agree with you in had aperture block failure on two Pentax K50's and my K70 I had the K70 repaired and it works fine now. I choose to buy a used K3-11 from KEH camera in three years I have had no problems with the camera. I used it on a week hiking trip in the California Redwoods and a month in Europe as well as a week trip to Chicago
From the start, when I hear that we’re going to measure autofocus speed, the comparison seems pointless. Different cameras have different motors for focusing, and the quality, consistency, and precision of focus don’t just depend on motor speed. For example, I have two lenses on my Pentax K3ii: the DA 15mm Limited and the HD DA* 11-18mm WR. The 11-18mm lens actually focuses slower; the older 15mm Limited lens reaches focus from one extreme to the other faster than the newer 11-18mm. However, with the older lens, the camera typically reaches an approximate focus point and then needs two to three micro-adjustments, while the 11-18mm usually locks focus in one step and holds it there. In practice, the 11-18mm is much faster, more precise, consistent, and more useful. Although a synthetic test might show the older DA 15mm Limited as faster in moving from point to point, this doesn’t reflect real-world performance.
When I think about my Sigma 18-35mm Art lens, which is relatively slow in moving focus through the entire range, it’s also quite slow when focusing on a person or object. However, this slowness has never really bothered me. What does bother me is the lack of accuracy: constant shifts in focus points, micro-adjustments, and, in the end, focus isn’t where it should be. This means I have to constantly check each shot to see if the focus is correct, which is frustrating, especially when the person is waiting - “just a bit longer, let’s try one more time.” Eventually, I get tired of this and switch to live view. In live view mode, the focus is spot-on, even if it takes longer than phase-detection autofocus, since live view (contrast-detection autofocus) is almost always precise. In practice, this means shooting in live view mode is faster and more efficient than focusing through the viewfinder, no matter how fast the lens or camera can move the focus from one end to the other. That speed is simply irrelevant.
I don't understand why there would be any difference in focusing speed between one camera and another if the focusing is handled by the lens itself (this applies to both DC and PLM motors).
Furthermore, it seems you’re using different lenses across the cameras. How can the results be comparable if the same lens isn’t used on both cameras? To ensure a fair comparison, you would need to use the exact same lens on both cameras, as even two identical lenses may not be perfectly the same.
As mentioned, focusing speed is absolutely irrelevant. Unfortunately, I haven’t had the chance to test the K-3 Mark III at a wedding, where I mainly use the K-5 Mark II and the K-3 Mark II, which are somewhat comparable. Before that, I used the K-r, which was far behind, especially under artificial lighting. With Pentax, it’s never been about speed but always about accuracy-and the frustration of not knowing if the focus is exactly where it should be. Pentax often avoids focusing on faces, as if faces were "contagious," opting instead to focus on the background if possible. With live view mode, these frustrations disappear, speed aside. Once I realized this, I started shooting 90% of a wedding in live view. Although it has its limitations, the results count. And, of course, there’s no subject tracking; with Pentax, it’s either unreliable or doesn’t work at all.
I started with the same lens on each camera. D FA 100mm Macro, then DC 18-135 WR, then 55-300 PLM. I then took the slowest focusing lens due to the long focus throw and mounted that to the K-3 III and the fastest focusing lens (55-300 PLM) mounted to the K-3. Both lenses were set to minimum focus distance and the subject was basically at infinity focus. Both cameras were set to focus priority. The K-3 III with the macro lens focused just as fast as the PLM on the K-3. I figured that was sufficient enough to show there's been improvements. I did state in the video, that I didn't do one lens on each body over and over for this video. But, if people are willing to watch an "extended version". I'll happily do one.
@@KobieMC the real elephant in the room is how to focus actually perform on real world. And speed was not an issue even on KR, let alone K5ii. I see only slight improvement on K3ii, regardting speed. The real difference between those three cameras are in accuracy. K5 Mark II significantly improved keeper rate under artificial light. Wild k3 improved how robust the autofocus is in low light. In great light both cameras are in same ballpark. I see greatest improvement between old screwdriver lenses and most recent modern Pentax lenses. But focusing in live view is next level accuracy compared to phase detection. And when I working I only look how accurate how fast or how easy I can achieve Focus. I tested pentax kp: camera was really snappy and fast. Level of Keepers was my worst. 50% of images we're focused wrongly. With k32 which uses the same out of focus model but not tweaked, my keeper was around 80 to 90. And very same with k5 ii, which I use in parallel. I really can't find difference between those two cameras despite on paper k3 ought to have improved autofocus. Yes more Focus points and better decision in low light. For Pentax k-3 Mark III there is really no use if its 20, 30, 40% faster in Focus motor, but the result would be missed Focus.
If you’ve got that continuous micro-adjustment thing, I have noticed that with AF-C and shooting static or slow moving subjects. For me it seems worse with longer screw drive lenses (70-210-ish for instance). An easy fix (again, for me) was to switch to AF-S in those situations. It also seems to be way less of an issue with a DC or PLM lens (sorry, don’t have an SDM to test with), so swapping to the 55-300PLM or 70-200DC was another easy fix.
@@robvandenbrink9006 yes, AF-C continuously does micro adjustments on static objects. And switching to AF-S prevents that. But that does not mean auto focus is acquired properly in AF-S. I am used to use static auto focus and half-press shutter repeatedly, until AF stop moving, then I take a shot. But I figured out that all this Jiu-Jitsu with autofocus takes very much longer than if I just use live view and use contrast detection do the focus once and just take one shot and it's done.
I have two K1 mk2s and two K3 mk3s. They fulfill my needs. If they didn't, I would get rid of them. I got caught in the measurebaters trap back in the film days. Around the time that most people scanned negatives to get a digital copy. Blather and BS and lots of hurt feelings and pompous posturing. If the camera works for you, use it. Otherwise trade or sell it away and get something more your liking. I doubt that many common photogrpaphs have the test equipment and laboratory to make an objective 'dive'. This is just a very subjective blow of nonsensical hot air. Congrats though, my first thumbs down!