I have to admit to only having skimmed the numerous pages of comments that precede my post, but there are a couple of things that came to mind. My apologies if they were already covered by someone else. Here are my thoughts:
- Corporate sponsorships are nice
- Sometimes they are from camera makers...other times not. Yes, tripod, lighting, and even bag makers offer various levels of sponsorship.
- Some pro photogs have them...the vast majority do not
- Almost all pro photogs purchase, use, and wear out their own gear. It is a business expense just like studio rental and airfare.
- When you have a corporate sponsorship, you are beholden to your handlers
Whether Ben should get a free $1500 camera is sort of silly. After all, Pentax was giving K-7s away this time last year in several major cities around the U.S. to people who walked in off the street. Whether his talent warrants serious consideration from Pentax for corporate sponsorship is far less silly and obviously a reasonable possibility. The question that comes to my mind is why he would want to go that route (see the last bullet point above). After all, he has been there, done that, and it did not work out well when he was part of the stable.
Steve
(I have had opportunity to ask hard questions of a Pentax pro and was politely not given a meaningful answer...no surprise...the same would be true if I queried a Canon, Nikon, or <name your brand> employee about known product deficiencies.)