Web Analytics RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: AF Performance and Accuracy Verified for the New K-5 Firmware! ;-D

Sunday, February 03, 2013

AF Performance and Accuracy Verified for the New K-5 Firmware! ;-D

At the Field! :-D (@ the Hong Kong Wetland Park.)

















All the photos were taken with my K-5 with my F*300/4.5 lens mounted. The firmware programmed in body is the latest version of 1.14. Phase-matching AF was used mostly for nearly all the shots I took:-



What I subjectively felt was that the AF is somehow faster but I did not find any significant improvement in accuracy, which is yet considered to be fair to good. As for the metering accuracy, it seems that it is somehow improved.

Besides, I would like to add two images that were taken by my Pentax Q at the same place and same time. It is very convenient for not having to change lenses during shooting and especially when I was working with a bigger camera with a bigger lens. :-D It is quite ideal to have the small Q to shoot in conjunction for other things that do not require a long lens but a normal one.





Btw, who said the IQ of the Q is not good enough? The above are direct JPEGs from the camera but only just downsized and then lightly re-sharpened but no other re-touching of any! :-o

All Photos Above: Copyright RiceHigh (c) 2013. No copying nor re-using in any form anywhere is allowed unless my prior written permission is obtained. All Rights Reserved!

Comments (14)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
New firmware does improve K-5? "I'm afraid that this is just a wishful thinking!" :P
5 replies · active 634 weeks ago
Michael A.'s avatar

Michael A. · 634 weeks ago

What FACT is your "verdict" based on? Do you even have a K-5 to disproof RH's assessment? Or just talking cause bored....
I was sarcastic. I just referred to a statement of Ricehigh in another thread, who doubted improvement of flash accuracy. To say it in another words: If someone notices any improvements due to new firmware, it is "wishful thinking". If ricehigh notices an improvement, it is "not imagination" :).
Of course I am always right here and this is my site, you know? :-)
Of course. Even if you are completely wrong, you just know better :).
Its official, not imagination: "Improved stability for general performance."! Don't you see that? ;-)
"Btw, who said the IQ of the Q is not good enough?"

Er... You, Rice? Or do you other what you write?
2 replies · active 634 weeks ago
For a cheap guy like me, the Q is good when it is sold cheap enough, but not vice versa!
Price has nothing to do with what you said you were talking about image quality. The camera could have been free or not, just admit you had no idea what you were talking about and like many were going in a knee jerk dumb reaction to a sensor size spec on a paper.
(Do you forget what you write?)
4 replies · active 634 weeks ago
Don't you ever change your mind? Cut him some slack...the q was a joke @ 700. At half the price it is a good buy. Sure its not m4/3 quality, but it is also tiny and unobtrusive.
I haven't changed my mind! ;-) I bought my Q set at $300, what to lose? :-D
Oh you did change your mind. Now you are saying the W has good image quality and asking a question as if you were not able to answer it for yourself.
Cut slack to slack to Rice? You kidding? Price has nothing to do with this. Rice will always talk bad about Pentax most of the time often without having any idea what he is saying. I am not talking about being realistic and objective here mentioning the pros and cons. I am talking even about making things up!

Post a new comment

Comments by