Mike Johnston takes it back :)

mattdm · 09-10-2010, 11:51 AM

Yesterday, over at The Online Photographer, Mike Johnston called the 35mm f/2.4 redundant. But now, he's humbly changed his tune.

pxpaulx · 09-10-2010, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

Yesterday, over at The Online Photographer, Mike Johnston called the 35mm f/2.4 redundant. But now, he's humbly changed his tune.

Calling it redundant was somewhat of a snap judgment. Everything he has said in the 2nd article are just as true as his initial thoughts. Bottom line it is the first reasonably priced AF prime for digital from Pentax, so it is welcome whether other brands have that market and price point saturated or not. I read TOP regularly, I wonder if the site's part sponsorship from Pentax had anything to do with the 2nd glimpse!

mattdm · 09-10-2010, 12:25 PM

Originally posted by pxpaulx

Calling it redundant was somewhat of a snap judgment. Everything he has said in the 2nd article are just as true as his initial thoughts. Bottom line it is the first reasonably priced AF prime for digital from Pentax, so it is welcome whether other brands have that market and price point saturated or not. I read TOP regularly, I wonder if the site's part sponsorship from Pentax had anything to do with the 2nd glimpse!

I'm pretty sure he's not influenced in that way by sponsorships. I think all of the "hey!" comments were more of it, plus some time to think.

opiedog · 09-10-2010, 12:28 PM

good for him.

maybe charlie sorrel from the wired magazine needs to take mike's queue.

GSk · 09-10-2010, 12:49 PM

Who the f... is Mike Johnston?

Should I take notice of his statements?

WMBP · 09-10-2010, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by GSk

Who the f... is Mike Johnston?

Should I take notice of his statements?

He's the owner, proprietor and main author over at The Online Photographer Blog. He's at least my age and unlike me has spent his entire life in the world of photography, much of it as an editor. Very knowledgeable guy. He writes much less formally than the guys over at Luminous Landscape which is one of the reasons why so many people read him daily. I've gotten a lot of great ideas from his blog, in fact, it's probably my favorite photography blog out there.

He does tend to say what's on his mind without thinking TOO hard about it, and I think that's what he did the other day when he dissed the new Pentax 35 f/2.4. He got a ton of feedback telling him he was wrong, and he seems to have listened, hence today's apology.

If you love photography, I recommend that you check his blog out.

Will

thibs · 09-10-2010, 02:08 PM

Also, I do not remind Mike being condescendent.
Over at LL, they can be quite so (and this is an understatement, see their 'K7 review').

pxpaulx · 09-10-2010, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

I'm pretty sure he's not influenced in that way by sponsorships. I think all of the "hey!" comments were more of it, plus some time to think.

I agree, he generally writes as he sees it - both the first reaction and subsequent thoughts are all reasonable and valid in this case. Sponsorship aside on the site, it is generally obvious that he thinks positively of Pentax - putting out his honest opinions on the new release, and obviously many other photography subjects are what makes that site a great read!

**NaClH2O** · 09-10-2010, 02:47 PM

Originally posted by WMBP

He's the owner, proprietor and main author over at The Online Photographer Blog. He's at least my age and unlike me has spent his entire life in the world of photography, much of it as an editor. Very knowledgeable guy. He writes much less formally than the guys over at Luminous Landscape which is one of the reasons why so many people read him daily. I've gotten a lot of great ideas from his blog, in fact, it's probably my favorite photography blog out there.

He does tend to say what's on his mind without thinking TOO hard about it, and I think that's what he did the other day when he dissed the new Pentax 35 f/2.4. He got a ton of feedback telling him he was wrong, and he seems to have listened, hence today's apology.

If you love photography, I recommend that you check his blog out.

Will

I echo your thoughts exactly Will and Thibs' also. Very knowledgeable and not condescending. What a photog editor/writer should be. (and rarely is)

NaCl(and as far as I know his mainly shoots nikon)H2O

mattdm · 09-10-2010, 02:50 PM

It's a photography blog, not a gear blog (or a photograph blog, not that there's anything wrong with that).

Blue · 09-10-2010, 03:40 PM

I can fault him for the initial response. I initially went ballistic when I saw the polycarbonate mount. At the end of the day, that is the only thing I can really fault it for until I get to try one out to compare to the FA 35/2. It does lose the aperture ring, but so did all DA lenses and even the latest D FA which is because the dSLR line doesn't need them.

solar1 · 09-10-2010, 03:49 PM

"I wish they'd build a digital Spotmatic, with a full-sized sensor and a body you can drive a car over. I already have the lenses."

Posted by: Mike Smith

solar1 · 09-10-2010, 04:00 PM

"Pentax is just crazy, crazy I tell you, for offering two lenses similar to each other.

Unlike Canon which currently offers...

70-200 L f/2.8
70-200 L f/2.8 IS
70-200 L f/4
70-200 L f/4 IS
70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS
70-300 L f/4-5.6 IS
70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM
75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM
75-300 f/4-5.6 III

:P "

Posted by: phule

opiet70 · 09-10-2010, 07:43 PM

Originally posted by solar1

"Pentax is just crazy, crazy I tell you, for offering two lenses similar to each other.

Unlike Canon which currently offers...

70-200 L f/2.8
70-200 L f/2.8 IS
70-200 L f/4
70-200 L f/4 IS
70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS
70-300 L f/4-5.6 IS
70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM
75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM
75-300 f/4-5.6 III

:P "

Posted by: phule

mickey · 09-10-2010, 07:51 PM

^ Good comments, indeed.

Here's one that I agree with, and I believe is Pentax's decision behind such a lens:

"So Pentax is encouraging K-x and K-r buyers to experience the pleasures of a matched normal prime that goes with those killer little cameras. That's a move I should approve of. I do."

09-10-2010, 11:51 AM	#1
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Mike Johnston takes it back :) Yesterday, over at The Online Photographer, Mike Johnston called the 35mm f/2.4 redundant. But now, he's humbly changed his tune.

09-10-2010, 02:47 PM	#9
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	+1 Originally posted by WMBP He's the owner, proprietor and main author over at The Online Photographer Blog. He's at least my age and unlike me has spent his entire life in the world of photography, much of it as an editor. Very knowledgeable guy. He writes much less formally than the guys over at Luminous Landscape which is one of the reasons why so many people read him daily. I've gotten a lot of great ideas from his blog, in fact, it's probably my favorite photography blog out there. He does tend to say what's on his mind without thinking TOO hard about it, and I think that's what he did the other day when he dissed the new Pentax 35 f/2.4. He got a ton of feedback telling him he was wrong, and he seems to have listened, hence today's apology. If you love photography, I recommend that you check his blog out. Will I echo your thoughts exactly Will and Thibs' also. Very knowledgeable and not condescending. What a photog editor/writer should be. (and rarely is) NaCl(and as far as I know his mainly shoots nikon)H2O

09-10-2010, 03:49 PM	#12
solar1 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Southern Calif Posts: 565	A favorite comment from TOP "I wish they'd build a digital Spotmatic, with a full-sized sensor and a body you can drive a car over. I already have the lenses." Posted by: Mike Smith Last edited by solar1; 09-10-2010 at 09:41 PM.

09-10-2010, 04:00 PM	#13
solar1 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Southern Calif Posts: 565	My other, other favorite comment: "Pentax is just crazy, crazy I tell you, for offering two lenses similar to each other. Unlike Canon which currently offers... 70-200 L f/2.8 70-200 L f/2.8 IS 70-200 L f/4 70-200 L f/4 IS 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS 70-300 L f/4-5.6 IS 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM 75-300 f/4-5.6 III :P " Posted by: phule

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax takes back refurb! DA*50-135 story....	the swede	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	01-29-2010 04:35 PM
Must read: Mike Johnston (The Online Photographer) article on K-7	cateto	Pentax News and Rumors	13	05-21-2009 12:27 AM
Mike Johnston on the DA 15mm Limited	mattdm	Pentax News and Rumors	4	05-20-2009 02:54 PM
Is FF for you? (By Mike Johnston)	soccerjoe5	Photographic Technique	40	01-03-2009 06:10 AM
EAA Young Eagles, Johnston County Airport, North Carolina	7.62lew	Post Your Photos!	5	09-15-2008 10:01 PM

09-10-2010, 12:17 PM	#2
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Originally posted by mattdm Yesterday, over at The Online Photographer, Mike Johnston called the 35mm f/2.4 redundant. But now, he's humbly changed his tune. Calling it redundant was somewhat of a snap judgment. Everything he has said in the 2nd article are just as true as his initial thoughts. Bottom line it is the first reasonably priced AF prime for digital from Pentax, so it is welcome whether other brands have that market and price point saturated or not. I read TOP regularly, I wonder if the site's part sponsorship from Pentax had anything to do with the 2nd glimpse!

09-10-2010, 12:25 PM	#3
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948 Original Poster	Originally posted by pxpaulx Calling it redundant was somewhat of a snap judgment. Everything he has said in the 2nd article are just as true as his initial thoughts. Bottom line it is the first reasonably priced AF prime for digital from Pentax, so it is welcome whether other brands have that market and price point saturated or not. I read TOP regularly, I wonder if the site's part sponsorship from Pentax had anything to do with the 2nd glimpse! I'm pretty sure he's not influenced in that way by sponsorships. I think all of the "hey!" comments were more of it, plus some time to think.

09-10-2010, 12:28 PM	#4
opiedog Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: NC Posts: 787	good for him. maybe charlie sorrel from the wired magazine needs to take mike's queue.

09-10-2010, 12:49 PM	#5
GSk Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Sørumsand, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59	Who the f... is Mike Johnston? Should I take notice of his statements?

09-10-2010, 01:38 PM	#6
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Originally posted by GSk Who the f... is Mike Johnston? Should I take notice of his statements? He's the owner, proprietor and main author over at The Online Photographer Blog. He's at least my age and unlike me has spent his entire life in the world of photography, much of it as an editor. Very knowledgeable guy. He writes much less formally than the guys over at Luminous Landscape which is one of the reasons why so many people read him daily. I've gotten a lot of great ideas from his blog, in fact, it's probably my favorite photography blog out there. He does tend to say what's on his mind without thinking TOO hard about it, and I think that's what he did the other day when he dissed the new Pentax 35 f/2.4. He got a ton of feedback telling him he was wrong, and he seems to have listened, hence today's apology. If you love photography, I recommend that you check his blog out. Will

09-10-2010, 02:08 PM	#7
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Also, I do not remind Mike being condescendent. Over at LL, they can be quite so (and this is an understatement, see their 'K7 review').

09-10-2010, 02:45 PM	#8
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Originally posted by mattdm I'm pretty sure he's not influenced in that way by sponsorships. I think all of the "hey!" comments were more of it, plus some time to think. I agree, he generally writes as he sees it - both the first reaction and subsequent thoughts are all reasonable and valid in this case. Sponsorship aside on the site, it is generally obvious that he thinks positively of Pentax - putting out his honest opinions on the new release, and obviously many other photography subjects are what makes that site a great read!

09-10-2010, 02:50 PM	#10
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948 Original Poster	It's a photography blog, not a gear blog (or a photograph blog, not that there's anything wrong with that).

09-10-2010, 03:40 PM	#11
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	I can fault him for the initial response. I initially went ballistic when I saw the polycarbonate mount. At the end of the day, that is the only thing I can really fault it for until I get to try one out to compare to the FA 35/2. It does lose the aperture ring, but so did all DA lenses and even the latest D FA which is because the dSLR line doesn't need them.

09-10-2010, 07:43 PM	#14
opiet70 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dallas, TX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 499	Originally posted by solar1 "Pentax is just crazy, crazy I tell you, for offering two lenses similar to each other. Unlike Canon which currently offers... 70-200 L f/2.8 70-200 L f/2.8 IS 70-200 L f/4 70-200 L f/4 IS 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS 70-300 L f/4-5.6 IS 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM 75-300 f/4-5.6 III :P " Posted by: phule

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-10-2010, 07:51 PM	#15
mickey Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,146	^ Good comments, indeed. Here's one that I agree with, and I believe is Pentax's decision behind such a lens: "So Pentax is encouraging K-x and K-r buyers to experience the pleasures of a matched normal prime that goes with those killer little cameras. That's a move I should approve of. I do."