Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-21-2020, 11:36 AM - 4 Likes   #1
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 2,431
Digital Camera World - Best DSLRs

Nice to see some kind words regarding Pentax:

"Pentax makes only one full-frame DSLR, but it's a cracker!"

The best DSLR in 2020 | Digital Camera World

02-21-2020, 02:19 PM   #2
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
blackcloudbrew's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cotati, California USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,150
Nice but the one comment on the article just says, 'Nikon Camera is the best camera for photographers...' Gee, what was I thinking buying a K-1?
02-21-2020, 02:27 PM - 2 Likes   #3
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 34,315
At least they got mentioned. Way too often they don't.
02-21-2020, 02:39 PM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,804
QuoteOriginally posted by blackcloudbrew Quote
Nice but the one comment on the article just says, 'Nikon Camera is the best camera for photographers...' Gee, what was I thinking buying a K-1?
The individual who commented did so simply so he could post a link to his website.

02-21-2020, 05:34 PM   #5
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 2,431
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
At least they got mentioned. Way too often they don't.
My thoughts too, and then I think they did a good job of hitting important features, like IBIS, Astrotracer, Pixel Shift setting Pentax apart.

I liked their email teaser on it too - actually had Pentax in the title!



.
Attached Images
 
02-21-2020, 05:39 PM - 1 Like   #6
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 5,594
^ At the same time, since there are only three small format DSLR manufacturers left, it's not too difficult to quote the three of them.
02-21-2020, 06:33 PM - 2 Likes   #7
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 2,431
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
^ At the same time, since there are only three small format DSLR manufacturers left, it's not too difficult to quote the three of them.
True, but figured I'd try to spread some sunshine since there seems to be so much gloom recently.
02-22-2020, 05:31 AM - 8 Likes   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Bourbon, IN
Posts: 17
QuoteOriginally posted by clickclick Quote
True, but figured I'd try to spread some sunshine since there seems to be so much gloom recently.
Please allow me to spread some sunshine. Full disclosure: My digital camera is a Canon 80D. Bear with me, here. There is sunshine coming. When I considered moving from film to digital about 15 years ago, I took some long looks at everything available at that time from Pentax, Nikon, and Canon. I decided to go with Canon because of Canon's huge variety of highly-regarded lenses. I spent almost 40 years shooting film, and only worrying about which film I was using; the camera was essentially a light-box, only peripherally involved in the making of my photos; I could work with any camera; the film is what mattered.

Then digital led me astray. Over the course of 10+ years, I spent an estimated $20,000 (US) on Canon gear. Don't have a cow, I buy and sell a lot of used equipment, even today. One day about 2 years ago, I realized I was growing bored with photography. A friend of mine asked several leading questions, the most telling of which was, "If you designed your next camera, what would it be like?" Answer: Full frame 36x24 sensor, 2 modes - Aperture priority and Manual, 1 focus point dead in the middle of the frame, and center-weighted average metering, ONLY. Nothing else, no rear screen required, no built-in flash, no movie modes. His reply stunned me. He said, "Buy a Pentax K-1000, or a Contax 139." I was stunned. Yes! I want something that just takes photographs!

I bought a few old 35mm bodies from E-Bay. I was amazed at how different my photographic process had become while using digital gear. I grew up with 120-film box cameras, graduated to 35mm SLR in the '70s, and finally to digital in about 2005. The all-manual 35mm cameras made me feel like I was home again, a little kid with a camera again. I was enjoying photography again. Once I had gotten several rolls of film back from TheDarkRoom.com (shameless plug), I was hooked. What else amazed me was the quality of some of my shots. If I do my part correctly, I get good results. It slowly dawned on me that which camera I was using DOES NOT MATTER. THE CAMERA IS ONLY A LIGHT BOX.

On this realization, I began selling off my Canon gear. All APS-H bodies went first. Then the full frame bodies. Then the full frame lenses. My photography suffered not one bit from moving to the crop-sensor 80D, and all crop-sensor glass. By now I had several old 35mm (all C/Y mount) cameras and a few compatible lenses. On a whim, I got a 645 (not N, D, Z, just 645) body and 75mm lens. I was hooked! This is the best camera I've ever used. I love the big negatives, and the prints are amazing. Even at that, it took me a few rolls to realize that it ain't the camera. Shocker! It ain't the film either. The main essential ingredient in photography is the PHOTOGRAPHER. Whooodathunkit?


Which brings me to the sunshine. Don't fall for the camera companies' (all of them) marketing hype that you NEED A BETTER CAMERA!. That is a product of (mainly) the digital age. They want you to buy a new camera every 18 months. (I used a Yashica FX-3 S2K from new in the early '80s until the shutter died in 2009. Almost 30 years. RIP, old friend.) Don't buy the online reviews of the which camera is better for this or that. None of them give a frog's fat patoot about you or your photography. They want you to buy the magazine, visit their web-site, see their advertising. BUY WHAT WORKS FOR YOU. The camera is only a light-box. Different light-boxes will of course have different features. If this company offers that, and that reviewer says this, take it with a grain of salt. None of that matters. The important thing is the photograph.


My photographic journey started with 1940s medium format film camera. I am now shooting Pentax medium format film cameras, and Mamiya, Agfa, and Voigtlander medium format film cameras from the 1940s and 1950s. I am happier than ever with my photography and my photographs. Ignore the hype. Ignore the reviews. Look at the photographs. That is what matters. Shoot what you want. Everything else is just "Keeping up with the Jones's." Now, go shoot some photos, and enjoy the sunshine.

02-22-2020, 06:22 AM - 1 Like   #9
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
BirdDude007's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Las Vegas NV
Photos: Albums
Posts: 732
QuoteOriginally posted by Bassat Quote
Please allow me to spread some sunshine. Full disclosure: My digital camera is a Canon 80D. Bear with me, here. There is sunshine coming. When I considered moving from film to digital about 15 years ago, I took some long looks at everything available at that time from Pentax, Nikon, and Canon. I decided to go with Canon because of Canon's huge variety of highly-regarded lenses. I spent almost 40 years shooting film, and only worrying about which film I was using; the camera was essentially a light-box, only peripherally involved in the making of my photos; I could work with any camera; the film is what mattered.

Then digital led me astray. Over the course of 10+ years, I spent an estimated $20,000 (US) on Canon gear. Don't have a cow, I buy and sell a lot of used equipment, even today. One day about 2 years ago, I realized I was growing bored with photography. A friend of mine asked several leading questions, the most telling of which was, "If you designed your next camera, what would it be like?" Answer: Full frame 36x24 sensor, 2 modes - Aperture priority and Manual, 1 focus point dead in the middle of the frame, and center-weighted average metering, ONLY. Nothing else, no rear screen required, no built-in flash, no movie modes. His reply stunned me. He said, "Buy a Pentax K-1000, or a Contax 139." I was stunned. Yes! I want something that just takes photographs!

I bought a few old 35mm bodies from E-Bay. I was amazed at how different my photographic process had become while using digital gear. I grew up with 120-film box cameras, graduated to 35mm SLR in the '70s, and finally to digital in about 2005. The all-manual 35mm cameras made me feel like I was home again, a little kid with a camera again. I was enjoying photography again. Once I had gotten several rolls of film back from TheDarkRoom.com (shameless plug), I was hooked. What else amazed me was the quality of some of my shots. If I do my part correctly, I get good results. It slowly dawned on me that which camera I was using DOES NOT MATTER. THE CAMERA IS ONLY A LIGHT BOX.

On this realization, I began selling off my Canon gear. All APS-H bodies went first. Then the full frame bodies. Then the full frame lenses. My photography suffered not one bit from moving to the crop-sensor 80D, and all crop-sensor glass. By now I had several old 35mm (all C/Y mount) cameras and a few compatible lenses. On a whim, I got a 645 (not N, D, Z, just 645) body and 75mm lens. I was hooked! This is the best camera I've ever used. I love the big negatives, and the prints are amazing. Even at that, it took me a few rolls to realize that it ain't the camera. Shocker! It ain't the film either. The main essential ingredient in photography is the PHOTOGRAPHER. Whooodathunkit?


Which brings me to the sunshine. Don't fall for the camera companies' (all of them) marketing hype that you NEED A BETTER CAMERA!. That is a product of (mainly) the digital age. They want you to buy a new camera every 18 months. (I used a Yashica FX-3 S2K from new in the early '80s until the shutter died in 2009. Almost 30 years. RIP, old friend.) Don't buy the online reviews of the which camera is better for this or that. None of them give a frog's fat patoot about you or your photography. They want you to buy the magazine, visit their web-site, see their advertising. BUY WHAT WORKS FOR YOU. The camera is only a light-box. Different light-boxes will of course have different features. If this company offers that, and that reviewer says this, take it with a grain of salt. None of that matters. The important thing is the photograph.


My photographic journey started with 1940s medium format film camera. I am now shooting Pentax medium format film cameras, and Mamiya, Agfa, and Voigtlander medium format film cameras from the 1940s and 1950s. I am happier than ever with my photography and my photographs. Ignore the hype. Ignore the reviews. Look at the photographs. That is what matters. Shoot what you want. Everything else is just "Keeping up with the Jones's." Now, go shoot some photos, and enjoy the sunshine.
So well put......thanks I needed that...
02-22-2020, 07:05 AM - 1 Like   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 2,431
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Bassat Quote
Answer: Full frame 36x24 sensor, 2 modes - Aperture priority and Manual, 1 focus point dead in the middle of the frame, and center-weighted average metering, ONLY. Nothing else, no rear screen required, no built-in flash, no movie modes. His reply stunned me. He said, "Buy a Pentax K-1000, or a Contax 139." I was stunned. Yes! I want something that just takes photographs!
Yep, pretty much nails it. It's so easy to get sucked down the "feature" rabbit hole. My first 35mm camera was a K-1000 I bought new in '77, but sadly, it was stolen from me at gun point. I bought my ME Super to replace it (still have it), but have missed the K-1000, and several weeks ago finally found one on eBay that fit what I was looking for, and it is now sitting a few feet from me. Back to basics is a nice thing.
02-22-2020, 07:32 AM - 1 Like   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
c.a.m's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,138
QuoteOriginally posted by clickclick Quote
Digital Camera World - Best DSLRs
Thanks for the link. Always good to see the Pentax brand highlighted.

With regards to the linked "Best DSLR" article, the Pentax K-1 II seems to be generally well-regarded in the summary. The magazine's more-extensive underlying review article gives a deeper treatment and rates it 4.5 stars out of 5. The format of listing only two 'pros' and two 'cons' for the K-1 II seems unnecessarily restrictive for a camera that has a lot of strong features.

One of the two 'cons' is the battery life of "670 shots." Gee, carry an extra battery and you've got a 1300-shot capacity, which readily overcomes the stated 'con'. Not too shabby, I'd say!

I also note that the overview that I see on my screen is populated with links to retailers. Is this an objective article? Still, it's a positive shout-out to the K-1.


QuoteOriginally posted by Bassat Quote
The important thing is the photograph.
I appreciated your essay, which reflects your many years of experience. It highlights several key aspects of photography and equipment. I think it also reflects the subjective nature of this type of "top ten" or "best of" overview article. What is 'best' for one photographer is not best for another.

The end result of the photographic process -- the photograph -- is indeed important. How one arrives at that end point depends on many elements, including the choice of subject, lighting, composition, perspective, focusing, exposure, post-processing, image display, etc. Of course, one's camera and lens plays a key role. While I agree that companies' marketing efforts are aimed at getting consumers to buy, buy, buy -- often pitched to evoke an emotional response -- I also agree that there is room for photographers to base their choices of gear on rational, objective thinking.

Certainly, I would think that some photographers enjoy using a bare-bones, basic camera. In the film world, the K1000 is often touted as the archetypal model in this regard. Yet, many other photographers appreciate a more sophisticated camera. Is there a middle ground between the companies' emotional marketing pitches and the consumers' desire for acquiring 'better' equipment? I think so. "Ignor[ing] the hype" is key. However, solid, objective reviews can be extremely useful in one's assessment of whether to acquire a new piece of gear.

In my case, I 'upgraded' from a K-5 II to a K-3 II. My K-5 II produced fine photographs; it still does. But my K-3 brings features that I think have enhanced my photography, including a higher resolution, pixel shift, better exposure metering, and better autofocus, among others. I wasn't lured particularly by any 'marketing' hype of Ricoh Imaging, nor by any hyperbole that is often seen online. I did refer to in-depth reviews as well as to discussions here on Pentax Forums. I think I made my decision based on an objective analysis of how the K-3 II would enhance my photographic experience, and my photographs. So, I'd have to agree with your theme of buying "what works for you."

- Craig

Last edited by c.a.m; 02-22-2020 at 09:57 AM.
02-22-2020, 08:26 AM   #12
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,804
I think one's personality informs how one processes camera advertisements. I don't think I've ever seen a camera ad telling me that I "NEED A BETTER CAMERA". Usually, I see the ad promote a feature, imply a lifestyle, and display a pretty photo or three. It's all pretty interesting - I enjoy reading about features and mulling over whether they'd be useful to me - but I've never felt pressured to buy something.
02-22-2020, 08:42 AM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Bourbon, IN
Posts: 17
QuoteOriginally posted by c.a.m Quote
Thanks for the link. Always good to see the Pentax brand highlighted.

With regards to the linked "Best DSLR" article, it seems to me to be somewhat superficial. While the Pentax K-1 II seems to be generally well-regarded in the summary, it's a shallow reflection of the magazine's more-extensive underlying review article (rated 4.5 stars out of 5). The format of listing only two 'pros' and two 'cons' for the K-1 II seems unnecessarily restrictive for a camera that has a lot of strong features.

One of the two 'cons' is the battery life of "670 shots." Gee, carry an extra battery and you've got a 1300-shot capacity, which readily overcomes the stated 'con'. Not too shabby, I'd say!

I also note that the overview that I see on my screen is populated with links to retailers. Is this an objective article?




I appreciated your essay, which reflects your many years of experience. It highlights several key aspects of photography and equipment. I think it also reflects the subjective nature of this type of "top ten" or "best of" overview article. What is 'best' for one photographer is not best for another.

The end result of the photographic process -- the photograph -- is indeed important. In digital photography, how one arrives at that end point depends on many elements, including the choice of subject, lighting, composition, perspective, focusing, exposure, post-processing, image display, etc. Of course, one's camera and lens plays a key role. While I agree that companies' marketing efforts are aimed at getting consumers to buy, buy, buy -- often pitched at evoking an emotional response -- I also agree that there is room for photographers to base their choices of gear on rational, objective thinking.

Certainly, I would think that some photographers enjoy using a bare-bones, basic camera. In the film world, the K1000 is often touted as the archetypal model in this regard. Yet, many other photographers appreciate a more sophisticated camera. Is there a middle ground between the companies' emotional marketing pitches and the consumers' desire for acquiring 'better' equipment? I think so. "Ignor[ing] the hype" is key. However, solid, objective reviews can be extremely useful in one's assessment of whether to acquire a new piece of gear.

In my case, I 'upgraded' from a K-5 II to a K-3 II. My K-5 II certainly produced fine photographs; it still does. But my K-3 brings certain features that I think have enhanced my photography, including a higher resolution, pixel shift, better exposure metering, and better autofocus, among others. I wasn't lured particularly by any 'marketing' hype of Ricoh Imaging, nor by any hyperbole that is often seen in online reviews and comments. I did refer to several in-depth reviews as well as to comments and discussions here on Pentax Forums. I think I made my decision based on an objective analysis of how the K-3 II would enhance my photographic experience, and my photographs. So, I'd have to agree with your theme of buying "what works for you."

- Craig
It seems we both see the world through similar colored glasses. I readily admit that 'features' will move a photographer from one piece of gear to another. I am/was/am basically a landscape shooter. The high-point of my landscape gear was Canon full frame and good zooms, I didn't need f/1.2 for anything, ever. Then my grandkids got into field sports at school. Old gear not ideal by any means. I bought a Canon 1D series and some long L-zooms. 10 fps, complete AF programmability, all features I needed for that type of shooting. Kids are grown; I am back to landscape work. Selling off the Canon EF gear left me open to 'new' stuff again. I found, and fell in love with the Pentax 645 system. I am now the proud owner of 2 perfectly functioning 645N bodies. My camera needs have changed several times over the last 50+ years. I am happy to have a huge variety of gear from which to choose.

For the most part, I don't give a FFA what reviewers have to say. Their (most of them) primary goal is to present me/you to their advertisers. I rely on people who actually use the gear. They are readily available on forums like this one.
02-22-2020, 08:43 AM - 1 Like   #14
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 34,315
That has to be the most off topic post I've seen in a while....
Since acquiring a 55" 4k TV which runs slide shows of my work, I've made one print.
Digital made getting images easier.
Now it's made output better in every sense. Storage of images, start to finish workflow without a whole room dedicated to enlargers etc., no messing round with smelly chemistry or dumping it into the environment.

I have to ask how is buying a film camera and then always buying film and paying for processing less a form of consumerism that buying all your digital "film" when you buy your camera. I haven't spent money on a print in 3 years, yet I've looked at 1000s of photographs, up to 5,000 a week on digital slideshows.

I also started with 120 medium format when I was maybe 8 or 9. Attempts to even use my film equipment, Ricohflex Model II, Pentax 645, Me and Program plus is too time consuming and doesn't product the results I want. I used to come home from a 10 day canoe trip with 10 rolls of film, and 99% of the images were never seen at a size more than 4x6.

Now after I come home I have 800-1200 images and am seeing every image I consider to be in some away interesting at 47x26 inches a day or two later.
Bottom line, I see my images a lot more than I used to, I see them at three times the contrast and DR, and 7 times the size and I have a lot more control over the final output. Our last trip produced an absolutely glorious 500 image slide show, with 17 different magical sunsets and full photo journal description of our 19 day trip.

I used to take a lot of images I rarely saw again after the day I brought them home, and definitely never saw at 20-47 inches x 26" in size.
I still enjoy taking my pictures. But I see them a lot more with digital.

The last time I tried a few rolls of film maybe 5 years ago, I just found the whole process tedious and truly annoying.

Each to their own I guess. In my case, I take way to many 5 star images to do them all justice with prints. Not enough room for storage, not enough wall space to display even a fraction of them. As it is when I sit down for a snack and beverage at 4. I run the slide show and absent mindedly watch the images go by while talking about the events fo the day with the wife. Sometimes one reminds us of something or we just have to stop and admire the image. The dozens of photo albums in the basement with work from before digital sit untouched in boxes in the basement.

I still find the process of creating images fascinating and enjoyable, but I'm enjoying the output a lot more because of digital display. If you're doing a lot of digital display, analogue input just doesn't make sense.
--------------------------------

By the way, how about that K-1 being appreciated by an on-line magazine? You don't see that every day.

Last edited by normhead; 02-22-2020 at 09:05 AM.
02-22-2020, 09:56 AM   #15
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,752
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
By the way, how about that K-1 being appreciated by an on-line magazine? You don't see that every day.
K1 is great for the money. I don't understand why it's not more popular. Or I understand that a great camera is not enough to achieve popularity. If the K1 was a Canon it would sell 20 times more, and you would see K1 everywhere, but just because it's sold by Pentax, the number of customers is a lot less, it's unrelated to the camera itself, it's related to how many retailers offer that camera, how large is the user of k mount and how much money they have to spend.

---------- Post added 22-02-20 at 18:05 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The last time I tried a few rolls of film maybe 5 years ago, I just found the whole process tedious and truly annoying.
With digital, you can crop and you can stitch images for free, if well done it's invisible, you could hardly do this with film. Digital is great, the only thing no so great is the price to pay upfront for camera bodies and a set of lenses. One can always argue that if you only buy the most used lenses (such as a 28-105), the system costs much less yet can still take 80% of images.
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!
camera, camera world, cameras, cost, dslr, film, format, frames, ii, ilc, images, k-7, k1, lenses, mean, mk, money, nikon, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photo industry, photographs, photography, post, reviews, shutter, time, user, world
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The "Vintage Digital Camera" thread (celebrating old, obsolete digital cameras!) BigMackCam General Photography 48 11-18-2019 04:46 PM
“World’s Best” photographers are sticking with DSLRs – Fstoppers RobA_Oz Photographic Industry and Professionals 45 04-30-2019 03:12 PM
Nature The best camera in the world........... Heinrich Lohmann Post Your Photos! 10 07-02-2018 09:45 PM
Panasonic LUMIX ZS20 : World’s Slimmest Digital Camera with a 20x Optical Zoom Lens jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 2 01-31-2012 11:29 AM
Pentax DSLRS RAW + JPEG, and all DSLRs for that matter. ebooks4pentax Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 10-01-2008 01:59 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:57 AM. | 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