[Pentaxor]

After all is said and done and I quit whining........, I will probably buy the K7. I did get really pissed about the lens price increases though.

that has got to be the most upsetting part when I jumped over to Pentax. I got very high expectations since I would be able to get access to a very wide variety of excellent cheap and affordable Pentax glasses, especially the new ones. I just hope that Pentax HOYA wakes up and listens to their old and new customers. they owe their newly rejuvenated brand to us. anyway, I have no regrets of jumping over. and honestly speaking, the K-7 is the biggest saving grace that Pentax has done at the moment.

[raz]

guys, this is good news.

1)We get rid of him off this forum

2)his blog will not bash Pentax anymore and will be called from now on: "In bed with my Canon, a true love story of romance and passion"

[mickey]

First off, forgive me for posting in this thread and keeping it at the top of page one.

I was just wondering if he actually posted any of his own pics here ever?

Part of me thinks that he's posted some of that cus he wants to blatantly slate Pentax, and also cus he knows his bashing will spread like wildfire amongst the community, getting his blog some well-needed hits.

So, he didn't actually test camera himself?
Rather, he just compiled all of the reviews and then pieced his verdict together from all the negative points.

Mind you, on a side note, like most people, the price of the Pentax lenses is disappointing.
3rd party on the used market is how I will go.

[Wheatfield]

RH does have a valid point about lens price trends in Pentaxland though.

That recent price trend (up, up, up!) is really doing damage to the marque.

This points to a real problem with what Pentax allowed to happen to their brand. The let themselves become known as the cheap whores of the camera business and now that they are in a position where they need to make some money they are getting whacked over the head for it.
I can't be bothered with doing the research, but is Pentax glass significantly more expensive now than comparable lenses from Nikon or Canon? How about compared to what Leica is putting on the market for the M8.
Why do people feel entitled to think they have a right to demand world class lenses for cheap junk pricing?
If the glass is of similar or better quality as what the competition is making, do people think that the lens price fairy is somehow going to appear and sprinkle magic price reducing Pixie Dust to allow Pentax to make good glass for less money than their competitors and them amortize the R&D and production costs over probably 1/500 of the units sold?
Good glass costs money. It's always been this way, and it will always be this way.
Good glass for high pixel count digital cameras costs more money because the sensors are more demanding of the lenses.

If you want Pentax to make good lenses for cheap, then you will also have to figure out a way for them to survive by hawking 6mp SLRs in a 15mp world.
We want high MP cameras and lenses that take advantage of those cameras. Now we have to pay for what we've said we want.
Get used to it, because it doesn't matter what brand you buy, good glass is going to cost good money.
Pentax's worst enemy is not the RiceHighs of the world, Pentax's worst enemy is an uninformed user base who think that good stuff shouldn't cost good money.

---

Last edited by Wheatfield; 07-06-2009 at 09:12 AM.

[ManuH]

So, he didn't actually test camera himself?
Rather, he just compiled all of the reviews and then pieced his verdict together from all the negative points.

It reminds me this. I think RH qualifies for being an "Online Expert or Armchair Photographer". His blog has low credibility since he doesn't own the cameras he criticize, he base his uninformed opinions on selectively choosen various tests around the internet.

[stanleyk]

"I had done a test run last night with the K-7 using an A 50 1/1.2 lens. and basing from the initial results that I got, I'm really virtually speechless nor can't describe the sensation. performance was way above expectations and IQ was optimally phenomenal."

Thank you, I REALLY did not need to read this....

Between the new cholesterol meds my doctor put me on and the very expensive "dog at large" ticket that fascist cop gave me a couple of weeks ago, I'll have to wait another 2 months. Stanley(my dog) and I are going camping in Vermont at the end of September. Hopefully, I'll have enough saved up by then. On the plus side I just got a DA 21.

[attack11]

Actually I wouldn't call him clueless. Although judging about K-7 camera by reading someone else reviews is not smart indeed, but he had a few good points about Pentax flash, and exposure systems before. And I think he is correct about recent price hikes. I also do not think that starting new system with Pentax makes sense anymore. If I was buying my first DSLR today, I would probably go to Canon.

really? i can't think of any system that has a better, modern prime system for their dslrs than pentax. it's the reason i started fresh in '06 with an *ist dl. i could've gone canon like it was suggested, but in the end it's about the glass... not the body.

[Old Timer 56]

really? i can't think of any system that has a better, modern prime system for their dslrs than pentax. it's the reason i started fresh in '06 with an *ist dl. i could've gone canon like it was suggested, but in the end it's about the glass... not the body.

I agree wholeheartedly. I went to Pentax mainly because of their primes (but also the in-body stabilization). I now have all three "pancake" lenses and they are the only ones I use.

Regarding lens cost, I notice that the current price (B&H) for the DA 40mm is $50 higher that what I paid in 2008. That's a lot. On the other hand, the price of the DA 21mm is $40 LESS than what I paid in 2007. Go figure.


I'm probably the only one to say this but for me the main attraction of the K7 is the metal body. Still have a chip on the corner of the baseplate of one of my K10D bodies, though it has no effect on the camera's functioning. Probably would affect its saleability, not that I would ever bother trying to sell it.

Richard

[ryan s]

Whilst totally and completely desparated with Pentax now

In the last weekend, I have used my reserved K-7 Kit + DA 15 funds to buy two Canon L Zooms (the 17-40/4L and the 70-200/4L IS) but still have had some money left and thus I have ordered a new EF 35/2 prime and there is still a little bit saving!!

Now he's even making up his own words

I want to know...how did he afford those 3 lenses and still have money left over? By my rough estimate, he would be about $100 in the red. Math fail? Unless they were used, it's close but there's probably not much left over.

DON'T CLICK ON RH's BLOG.

By visiting his site, you increase his google rankings and newbies who search out "reviews" of Pentax gear find him first and read without knowing what a tool he is. Do you really want RH to be the de facto voice of the "real story" on Pentax gear?

Seriously. If you find him offensive or clueless or idiotic then DON'T visit his site. By clicking you are giving him gravitas. He is an attention whore and nothing more. Don't feed the beast...

And mods, consider deleting this thread.

Yup.

Although this thread should stay, IMO

This points to a real problem with what Pentax allowed to happen to their brand. The let themselves become known as the cheap whores of the camera business and now that they are in a position where they need to make some money they are getting whacked over the head for it.
I can't be bothered with doing the research, but is Pentax glass significantly more expensive now than comparable lenses from Nikon or Canon? How about compared to what Leica is putting on the market for the M8.
Why do people feel entitled to think they have a right to demand world class lenses for cheap junk pricing?
If the glass is of similar or better quality as what the competition is making, do people think that the lens price fairy is somehow going to appear and sprinkle magic price reducing Pixie Dust to allow Pentax to make good glass for less money than their competitors and them amortize the R&D and production costs over probably 1/500 of the units sold?
Good glass costs money. It's always been this way, and it will always be this way.
Good glass for high pixel count digital cameras costs more money because the sensors are more demanding of the lenses.

If you want Pentax to make good lenses for cheap, then you will also have to figure out a way for them to survive by hawking 6mp SLRs in a 15mp world.
We want high MP cameras and lenses that take advantage of those cameras. Now we have to pay for what we've said we want.
Get used to it, because it doesn't matter what brand you buy, good glass is going to cost good money.
Pentax's worst enemy is not the RiceHighs of the world, Pentax's worst enemy is an uninformed user base who think that good stuff shouldn't cost good money.

Sorry for the long quote but this has to be read again.

There's some hobbies where people want everything for nothing. If anyone knows people/are people who are into DSM cars (like the Eclipse/Talon/Laser), everybody wants the fastest car for the cheapest price. So what happens? You get the people who want to install made in China parts which drive the price up for quality pieces since they're losing volume profit so they need to make it up.

And there it comes down to "why spend $xxx up front when I can buy 3 of them at only $xxx?" The Made in China mentality is killing the US. But that's slightly off-topic, although the concept of quality versus value holds true.

The way I see it...once I have some money to spend freely, I want to get the Limiteds and a couple DA*s. Seriously...I'd rather have 5 good lenses rather than 20 OK lenses. Right now, I have stuff that works just fine since I don't have any money. Used is what I have because used is what I can afford.

At this point we're seeing who is really a price-only shopper. Good results from the Pentax was one of the reasons I bought into the system. The fair price was the kick in the ass I needed to make the switch. The grass isn't always greener, but once in a while, you do find the right fit

[krtwood]

Nikon has been adding affordable primes, while Pentax has been discontinuing them. If you wanted to start out with a nice selection of primes you could get the Nikon 35/1.8, 50/1.8, and 85/1.8 all for under $800 USD, with the 85 accounting for more than half of that. I don't think you can really make the argument that Pentax has the best lineup of primes. It's a different lineup, but then again you just can't get what Nikon offers on Pentax either.

[FotoPete]

He's got some points to make. In HK dec 08, I had a hell of a time looking for decently priced and in stock pentax glass and this was before the crazy price hikes of 2009.

I realized alot of the prices on HK, even across brands were markedly higher than those here in Toronto, Canada. And of course Canon owns the place. Big company billboard ads, tv ads from larger camera store chains like Broadway every like 5 secs, salemen and store presence, and of course everyone sporting a canon strap can make just about anyone become disillusioned with all other brands. And..thats also were I found a Samsung 35/2 priced double the FA35/2. LoL. One salesman told me the the coatings were better.

About exposure inaccuracies, I'm with Pentax on this one. (I thought it was clear they intended it to underexpose?) LoL

I don't see how RH is complaining about w/ regards to SR. Its better for wide angle while IS/VR is more suited for Tele. SR is better than nothing if you don't have IS/VR. SR is a one time purchase. IS/VR/OS is one that dings your wallet every darn time and is *NOT* available on everything.

anyways, I think for someone to allow their photography to be so solely hinged on Continuous AF / another AF modes...and contending with issues pertaining to such; infront of the computer is just fooling themselves.

RiceHigh, if you reading this, please...really lol, we already have a Ken Rockwell and he actually takes pictures as well. Use what you got and do photoblog and show the world the many facets of life in Hong Kong, not the dings and dents of the camera industry.

Panoramic taken 30/12/08 from The Peak, Hong Kong

[séamuis]

..

this guy is pathetics..



and make me wanna see what he can do with his current belonging..





does he/she have any sort kind of ..gallery or something so i can peek a little?

no. no he does not.

[Wheatfield]

Nikon has been adding affordable primes, while Pentax has been discontinuing them. If you wanted to start out with a nice selection of primes you could get the Nikon 35/1.8, 50/1.8, and 85/1.8 all for under $800 USD, with the 85 accounting for more than half of that. I don't think you can really make the argument that Pentax has the best lineup of primes. It's a different lineup, but then again you just can't get what Nikon offers on Pentax either.

I just added it up at B&H.
The Nikkors are going to cost closer to US$950.00, and AF isn't supported by the D40 and D60 bodies, which kind of makes them less than useful for a person who is just starting out with a beginner body.
Comparable Pentax focal lengths will cost more, at just under US$1200.00, but for this you get two limited lenses and the FA50/1.4 which is still listed, all are fully compatible with all Pentax DSLR bodies, and a couple of them have earned a reputation of being among the best lenses made.
To get full compatibility the Nikon buyer has to move up to the D5000 which narrows the price gap between Pentax and Nikon significantly, especially considering the price of a K2000 or the slightly more expensive K200.

[Blue]

I don't know what else you should expect from a Canon employee. I am firmly convinced that, dispite his claims to have been a long time Pentax shooter, that in reality he is nothing more than a stooge from the Canon propaganda department.

I have had the same suspicion. He has reviewed so many Pentax bodies yet he has only owned one older dSLR. The rest has been on "paper' or 10 minutes in a shop or holding someone's for a few minutes.

[Art Vandelay II]

I just added it up at B&H.
The Nikkors are going to cost closer to US$950.00, and AF isn't supported by the D40 and D60 bodies, which kind of makes them less than useful for a person who is just starting out with a beginner body.
Comparable Pentax focal lengths will cost more, at just under US$1200.00, but for this you get two limited lenses and the FA50/1.4 which is still listed, all are fully compatible with all Pentax DSLR bodies, and a couple of them have earned a reputation of being among the best lenses made.
To get full compatibility the Nikon buyer has to move up to the D5000 which narrows the price gap between Pentax and Nikon significantly, especially considering the price of a K2000 or the slightly more expensive K200.

The D5000 doesn't have a built in AF motor either. The best thing to do if you're on a budget is buy used or new after a camera is discontinued. In Nikon land the current best deal going is the D200. You can get them for $600 brand new with full warranty. Its IQ may not be quite as good as the newer 12mp sensor, but it's perfectly acceptable (especially when shooting RAW) and you'll get pro-grade build quality, fast AF and FPS, glass prism VF, x-sync port, built in Nikon CLS wireless flash control, and just about every other pro feature anyone needs. Of course if you want video, live view, and a camera that feels like a toy then the D5000 is the way to go.

Either way you're looking at $600 + $200 (35mm) + $120 (50mm 1.8). Then I'd personally pick up the 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 used for $190. All together you could have a nice little kit for $1100.

But that's the problem, like it or not Nikon is considered the superior brand in the publics eyes. Pentax can charge more then Nikon, but its going to take some marketing on their part to make people understand why they should pay more for the brand they know nothing about.