04-04-2018, 08:08 AM
I spent some time testing the K3's new AF system as it was then......obviously there were many improvements, more points, a supposed object recognition system using the exposure module. I didn't find object recognition functioned at all by the colour or shape of the subject, but just by it's distance.
AF-C had a much larger "dead-band" than AF-S (twice as much).....ie. the distance the subject could move before the AF system reacted with a focus change.....couple that to slowish AF motors and the system was running a step behind ..I'd posted my findings on DPreview etc. but you know how is? if you write anything negative......etc.
I was however rewarded from a DFPreview test of the AF that they found the same. In short, I was certain the AF-C problems were down to the dead-band plus sampling times.....all enough for the DPR cycle test to cause plenty of missed shots.
This new booster/processor was the missing ingredient.....up until now AF-C had been struggling to react quickly enough to keep up with the action and algorithms were probably simplified to keep the whole thing function within it's limitations.
With the calculating power increased, the no doubt faster sampling and new algorithms come together to produce something far more cohesive!
Anyway that's my ten cents worth......and I don't thinks it's far wrong!
AF-C had a much larger "dead-band" than AF-S (twice as much).....ie. the distance the subject could move before the AF system reacted with a focus change.....couple that to slowish AF motors and the system was running a step behind ..I'd posted my findings on DPreview etc. but you know how is? if you write anything negative......etc.
I was however rewarded from a DFPreview test of the AF that they found the same. In short, I was certain the AF-C problems were down to the dead-band plus sampling times.....all enough for the DPR cycle test to cause plenty of missed shots.
This new booster/processor was the missing ingredient.....up until now AF-C had been struggling to react quickly enough to keep up with the action and algorithms were probably simplified to keep the whole thing function within it's limitations.
With the calculating power increased, the no doubt faster sampling and new algorithms come together to produce something far more cohesive!
Anyway that's my ten cents worth......and I don't thinks it's far wrong!