[slackercruster]

Todd,
A very thoughtful discussion and subject.

I think people often get into hobbies or pursue "interests" as a way of socializing. I certainly do that. But photography can also be a way of producing "art", journalism, recording history, etc.

I get dismayed at the amount of personal attacks/animosity that are shown in some threads of the PF forums. I really wonder why the PF moderators tolerate so much of it. I used to be a moderator several years back, and when posters started the name calling routine, we simply deleted the inflammatory post. If the offending poster continued the name calling/personal attacks in other threads, we simply banned him or her. We didn't have time or desire to try to talk reason with folks who were attacking other people. For some reason on PF, moderators try not to offend anyone and the quality of discussion decreases in some threads, IMO.

But i am celebrating Todd's discussion by deleting subscriptions to 5 threads so far. I really would like to spend more time looking at great images and less time in technical discussions and brick walls. (I can suggest or recommend things to other people, but the only footsteps I can control are my own and as Todd suggested, my footsteps could lead in a more productive direction)

Yes, many guys hang out at the gun or Harley shop to socialize. When I was a kid and we had a cam store, that was where I hung out.

[slackercruster]

That would be a disappointment for sure. But I'm willing to let Ricoh do what they will and see how it pans out. I'm certainly not going to claim I know what's best for long-term corporate strategy, as so many others seem to be happy to do.

And if Pentax does go away, I'm a photographer who is defined by my personal style, preferences, and approach to the craft. Not defined by my gear. I would of course argue that any photographer who is defined by their gear is not really a photographer first and foremost.

There's also nothing wrong with shooting gear that's no longer manufactured or supported. It comes with some challenges, but can be well worth it. I just bought a Contax RX, and I am having a ton of fun with it...really fulfilling. If Ricoh kills Pentax, they won't be coming to my house and confiscating my lenses now, will they?

Already hard enough to get some gear. If Pentax went away it would be worse.

This is one of the areas that makes Pentax a non pro cam...you can't get a good supply of pro quaity gear.Pentax knew how to make pro gear, but getting it out of them is another thing.

[Arrvon]

I know i'm late arriving at the converation, but I just wanted to say thanks to Todd for bringing all of this up. Like Rio mentioned, I think we are are all three....

Everyone here is a 'photographer' in the sense that we all own cameras. We are all whiners...to some degree...it's human nature. We are all 'gear-fetishists' as well because we all own this photography gear, and like everything, it's impossible for any of it to be 'perfect.'

As timh mentioned, I agree with the sentiment that it's likely just human nature and common in every internet forum. As Todd mentioned, we are all guilty of this type posting at some point or another...because, well, it's human nature!

Perhaps for a nice break from all the gear bashing, brand bashing, etc. would be to create a sub-forum, mixing together the idea behind the 'post your photos!' and 'photographic technique' sub-forums but with a rule that no gear or brands be named/mentioned. Just photos being posted, techniques being discussed and shared, and learning from each other. (well in my case from everyone else) Really, any term that's important doesn't need to be about a brand or a specific lens. Just aperture, shutter speed, ISO, generic 'tripod', etc. can be used. Perhaps it could be a nice little haven where gear and brand doesn't matter....or perhaps human nature will get in the way again and ruin the idea behind it....who knows!

[Blue]

Yes, many guys hang out at the gun or Harley shop to socialize. When I was a kid and we had a cam store, that was where I hung out.

There isn't many places to hang out and talk photography these days, especially in my neck of the woods. Specialty forums help. Tallahassee was started as a Frontier outpost and in many was, it still is.

[Todd Adamson]

Todd,
the only footsteps I can control are my own and...my footsteps could lead in a more productive direction)

Great sentiment, Phil, thank you. That's what we'd all do best to keep in the forefront of our minds, in the forums, and in life. I'm certainly guilty of losing sight of that more often than I'd care to admit. But if we try hard not to, we do better overall.

Regarding your comments about the moderation here: my own feeling, so far, is that it's at a fairly appropriate level, but we all have different ideas of optimal cordiality. I've moderated a few forums myself, photography and other wise, and I've also been moderated many times, at various levels (including permanent IP ban, LMAO). I like to be able to mix it up a little without fear of instant smackdown, but I also think flame-war free-for-alls are generally a detriment to the venue hosting them.

[Todd Adamson]

Todd, after you finish your pint, I'll buy all of the dirty martinis you can drink --

That would be about three, at which point you'd either be photographing puke, or, worst case scenario, an episode of COPS.

How about instead of buying me drinks, you just let me have your LX for a few weeks? Oh, wait, you already did that....

[Todd Adamson]

This is one of the areas that makes Pentax a non pro cam...

Careful now, that's likely to bring down the hammer around here!:evil:

In all honesty, though, it addresses a point that people tend to miss: "professional" isn't just the capability of the gear itself, but also includes the service and support system for those depending on the gear to make a living. I won't comment on a Pentax support system with which I've had little experience, except to mention the one time I've sent a lens to Pentax; the service itself was excellent and speedy, however the communication and tracking of the job was fairly poor.

My experience with Nikon support has been on the whole positive, though not perfect.

[Todd Adamson]

I have a feeling someone's posted this by now, somewhere on these forums, but it's a must-read:

LensRentals.com - Hammerforum.com

[eddie1960]

I have a feeling someone's posted this by now, somewhere on these forums, but it's a must-read:

LensRentals.com - Hammerforum.com

you are right it has been posted. One of the funniest blogs i've read in a long time

many parts were favourites but i think this is the best

PS – for the several people who suggested nail guns should be included in the discussion, that wouldn’t work because . . . .

. . . . wait for it . . .

this forum doesn’t discuss point and shoots.

[RioRico]

PS – for the several people who suggested nail guns should be included in the discussion, that wouldn’t work because . . . .

. . . . wait for it . . .

this forum doesn’t discuss point and shoots.

But point-and-pound's are OK, eh?

[writeb]

Title is link bait, but the OP is quality - if a bit long.

Of course many of us are all three. We like photography, new shiny things, new technology, and the confidence and self-assuredness that comes along with having bought the best thing for the money spent.

You can't blame people for wanting their $1,500 purchase (and multiple thousands investment in lenses) to act in some form as a status symbol. It's a core marketing strategy used by a majority of products, be it Pentax, or any other camera manufacturer. People coalesce around these decisions (especially around adversity) and the inevitable team mentality arises. That's the elephant in the room as far as I'm concerned. There will always be the Joneses with the cool stuff, and they do play a role in buyer rationale, as even keeled and balanced as one purports to be.

Pentax fans in general are battle weary. They're self conscious, out-argued in volume, distracted, and ignored. This is the major flash point for invoking the major toxicity on PF. If I've just spent the past two hours of my life arguing with fools on DPReview or Engadget comment idiots who haven't touched a Pentax in their lives, of course I'm going to blow a fuse when I see someone on our home base spewing the same balderdash. It's taken personally - it just is what it is.

But my original premise is, similar to learning and teaching not being mutually exclusive, neither is being a lifetime student of the art of photography exclusive to gear lust, technical analysis, and being self conscious. All can certainly co-exist simultaneously. Just as some of the best photographers I know hate photography. If the point of the article was a passive aggressive way to encourage us to "choose one," then, that's a tougher pill, but point taken. :evil:

[Mareket]

If it helps anyone else, I found I started worrying a lot less about the optical qualities of my gear when I started using 1:2 zoom instead of 1:1 on Lightroom. You can still dig into the image and nosey around, but not so much that things go astray.

Because of that, I haven't got a single lens I don't love using anymore. I used to get all annoyed at 100% crops not looking right, but they're pointless anyway.

And today I felt like a photographer, I was scrambling through pouring rain down a slippery muddy slope outside a castle, swinging off trees to make sure I didn't fall. All to try and find a position I could take the shot I was imagining from (I didn't in the end, the clouds came in and obscured the landscape :[). Then I came back and read about the Olympus f/2.0 zooms in gear-head mode and then felt like whining about my on/off switch problem and not wanting to send my camera away again. So I'm definitely all three

Nothing wrong with whining and lusting, but I do recommend using the 1:2 zoom. It makes all your lenses seem incredible, and higher ISOs look beautiful.

[Ash]

We like photography, new shiny things, new technology, and the confidence and self-assuredness that comes along with having bought the best thing for the money spent

A ubiquitous phenomenon of the human condition, fleeting and very much like chasing after the wind. There is nothing wrong with supply meeting demand, but when demand is based more on wants versus needs, we can become quite entitled and unjustifiably dissatisfied.

You can't blame people for wanting their $1,500 purchase (and multiple thousands investment in lenses) to act in some form as a status symbol. It's a core marketing strategy used by a majority of products, be it Pentax, or any other camera manufacturer. People coalesce around these decisions (especially around adversity) and the inevitable team mentality arises.

It's clear Pentax markets more to the hobbyist and enthusiast rather than the professional, though increasingly the enthusiasts are demanding their gear to become more and more like the higher end Canons and Nikons. The large financial investment put into such gear is a form of pride, as vain as it can be, particularly as Pentax's target market value their gear highly - not merely tools as a means to an end.

Pentax fans in general are battle weary. They're self conscious, out-argued in volume, distracted, and ignored.

That's a nice damatisation, and a cool line for a script for a movie... but a touch exaggerated - Canon and Nikon will always be on top from sheer volume of sales and market share. Pentax continues to expand lens lineup and consistent release of new dSLR bodies (which I'll add is proportionally exceeding that of Pentax's competition if market share is taken into consideration). That's something at least the Pentaxian can be assured of, and the Canikonian cannot ignore...

But my original premise is, similar to learning and teaching not being mutually exclusive, neither is being a lifetime student of the art of photography exclusive to gear lust, technical analysis, and being self conscious. All can certainly co-exist simultaneously.

And is indelibly linked. We can be unsettled, and uncomfortable with what we have in our hands, and this drive to have the 'best' (however way this is defined) stirs up our discontent. It's clear that we can find lots of 'deficiencies' with what Pentax offers, but if the discerning photographer assesses what the Pentax gear can actually do, and stop focusing on the things it cannot, then there will be more satisfied shooting and less online grumbling.

[eddie1960]

If it helps anyone else, I found I started worrying a lot less about the optical qualities of my gear when I started using 1:2 zoom instead of 1:1 on Lightroom. You can still dig into the image and nosey around, but not so much that things go astray.

Because of that, I haven't got a single lens I don't love using anymore. I used to get all annoyed at 100% crops not looking right, but they're pointless anyway.

And today I felt like a photographer, I was scrambling through pouring rain down a slippery muddy slope outside a castle, swinging off trees to make sure I didn't fall. All to try and find a position I could take the shot I was imagining from (I didn't in the end, the clouds came in and obscured the landscape :[). Then I came back and read about the Olympus f/2.0 zooms in gear-head mode and then felt like whining about my on/off switch problem and not wanting to send my camera away again. So I'm definitely all three

Nothing wrong with whining and lusting, but I do recommend using the 1:2 zoom. It makes all your lenses seem incredible, and higher ISOs look beautiful.

sounds like a typical day

Oly's use of 4/3 and M4/3 means thos f2 overpriced lenses really only equte to a 2.8 zoom in apsc or an f4 in FF. Aside from light gathering capabilities - but them 4/3 M4/3 sensors don't perform as well as same gen apsc and FF sensors. meh enough gearheadedness

BTW i never use 100% in LR unless I am fixing a fine detail (so almost never) Every lens I have is more than sharp enough for web use, and for that matter sharp enough for almost all print use.

for a long time my tagline was
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept" - H. Cartier Bresson.

[Todd Adamson]

Oly's use of 4/3 and M4/3 means thos f2 overpriced lenses really only equte to a 2.8 zoom in apsc or an f4 in FF. Aside from light gathering capabilities - but them 4/3 M4/3 sensors don't perform as well as same gen apsc and FF sensors. meh enough gearheadedness

Ha! That's what I was thinking. To be perfectly honest, my own hypocrisy has been bleeding out of my eyes these last couple of days, because I have been doing almost incessant gear-googling: I'm about to go RANGEFINDER on y'alls asses.

And that Bresson quote has been the forefront of my consciousness, helping me to justify picking up the lowly Nokton 35/1.4, rather than holding out for a Zeiss. In fact, I've worked up my own version of that quote:

"Microcontrast is a bourgeois concept" --Todd Adamson

Hehe...think I'll make that my signature...even though I don't believe it.