Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-21-2013, 05:57 AM   #46
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,574
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
We're not talking exclusively about "serious photographers" we're talking about kits and what they ought to have in them.
There comes a point in a person's progression in photography where they realize that they will most likely get a better image with a Pentax Limited prime lens, for example, vs an off-brand "do everything" lens...regardless of camera body. I took the OP to be recognizing that fact and asking why companies don't bundle their cameras with a keeper lens vs an inexpensive lens. If we're going to be upgrading camera bodies due to technology changes anyway, why not make the lens more of a constant? Camera companies used to do that, btw. There are some very highly thought of old lenses that were considered "middle of the road" introductory lenses back in the film days. Specifically, I'm thinking of the various 50mm f1.7 lenses. Frankly, I think it's a good idea. The problem is that we'd be expecting new users to have the knowledge of experienced photographers...and that's kinda impossible. You can't put the cart ahead of the horse.

04-21-2013, 06:02 AM   #47
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,574
QuoteOriginally posted by arnold Quote
By what standard? Have look at this sample and tell me you could see it was taken by a throw away lens.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/mini-challenges-games-photo-stories/10402...ml#post2089919
Yes, yes...I know cheap lenses can do good work. That's not the point. For what it is, the 18-55 is a very good lens. But you're going to have a very hard time convincing anyone that it's an equal to the 16-45 or 16-50...which are lenses more along the lines of what the OP was saying should be bundled with inexpensive, replaceable bodies.
04-21-2013, 06:12 AM   #48
Veteran Member
crossmr's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 318
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
Yes, yes...I know cheap lenses can do good work. That's not the point. For what it is, the 18-55 is a very good lens. But you're going to have a very hard time convincing anyone that it's an equal to the 16-45 or 16-50...which are lenses more along the lines of what the OP was saying should be bundled with inexpensive, replaceable bodies.
because most beginners don't need a lens that good.
We're talking about beginners.
The lowest common denominator is the body. The body is the focus of the kit. The Lens is tacked on to be "good enough" to let a beginner start to use it out of the box.
Anyone serious about photography will buy various lenses that suit their needs, none of which are the same.
The body is the focus, not the lens.
Very few, if any, beginners would be using multiple bodies.
They might replace their bodies later on, but they're not likely to be "beginners" by the time they do that.

This is another one of those "really doesn't make much sense at all" from any perspective. You can't really mention beginner and frequently changing the body in the same sentence. Those aren't the same people.
The bodies are general purpose, the lens have a more specific purpose.
04-21-2013, 06:35 AM   #49
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,574
QuoteOriginally posted by crossmr Quote
The lowest common denominator is the body. The body is the focus of the kit. The Lens is tacked on to be "good enough" to let a beginner start to use it out of the box.
Yes...but the OP was simply questioning whether that's the right approach. Is the body...which may become rapidly dated due to changes in technology...the most important part of the kit? Or should the lens be more important? In an earlier post, I mentioned that camera companies used to do things differently. A good example of what the OP was addressing would be to recognize that a person used to be able to buy a K1000 with a 50mm f2, f1.7, or f1.4 lens. While the K1000 body was about the cheapest body available in those days and would have limited value these days, all of the lenses mentioned could serve a person well some 30 years after the fact. And, eh...maybe camera makers are still offering "keeper lenses" in their kits...but just on a different level. I'm certainly not one to talk. My "carry everywhere" camera is my K-01 with an old 28-90 FA kit lens on it. Maybe the answer is to allow buyers a huge variety of choices as to what they want their "kit lens" to be. Seems pretty simple to me. Stop offering pre-packaged "kits" and just give set discounts on lenses when purchased with a body regardless of whether that body is entry-level or top of the line.

08-02-2013, 07:29 AM   #50
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 773
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
I took the OP to be recognizing that fact and asking why companies don't bundle their cameras with a keeper lens vs an inexpensive lens.
That's almost opposite of what I came away with. I thought the question was: Why don't Pentax bundle their cameras with a cheap long-zoom lens? That's what most buyers think they want, and they'll never even realize it's rubbish! But instead Pentax keep bundling their DSLRs with decent quality glass in an actually useful-and-versatile zoom range, which many potential buyers pass over because they're too ignorant to appreciate its value.

Sorry, I guess I'm just in a really cynical mood today.
08-02-2013, 09:43 AM   #51
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,948
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
Yes, yes...I know cheap lenses can do good work. That's not the point. For what it is, the 18-55 is a very good lens.
Stop right there. For the price and weight, that's all you need. It's all about price point.

Many lenses will last long then the supporting electronics and shutter.

A LOT of buyers get the 2 zoom kit.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
body, change, lens, photo industry, photography, time to change
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Misc "Time Capsule" 1970 Welcome to my psychedelic "pad" charliezap Post Your Photos! 14 02-25-2012 05:55 PM
Good A 50mm F1.4 aperture lever ruined by "vandals", is there a way to cure it? minahasa Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 24 09-15-2011 10:40 AM
"The World Is a More Violent Place Than It Used to Be." -- NOT!!! MRRiley General Talk 3 08-18-2011 11:31 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:59 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top