I don't want to start a "which is better" argument. I'm just explaining why I switched. There is a lot to like in Pentax, especially the light weight, high performance, well built Limited lenses, the nice construction of the K10D body (better built than my Nikon D80), excellent wide angle lenses that are better and cheaper than the Nikkor alternatives, etc.

Every system has its pros and cons. It is just disappointing that Pentax is so slow in getting its planned products to market, and some users (like me) just won't wait.

I really respect your decission and I think that it is what many people not happy with their system/company should do. Actually, I like the fact of having people moving to another system without starting "jumping ship" threads. I just have a question. Did your priorities change after getting Pentax or you just trusted the Pentax roadmap? I ask you that because it might be a good lesson from your experience: "if you wanna buy from a (relatively) small company, do it only based on the existing products, if they dont fit you now it might not worth it".

[jms698]

So, here's a question I hope those under NDA should be able to answer:

Assuming someone had a *ist, or someone was looking to switch to Pentax from a Nikon D70, or Canon EOS 300D. So, someone with a camera that works well enough, but is thinking of replacing it sometime in the not too distant future.

Based upon your knowledge of what the "BIG" announcement in January will be, would such a person be better off waiting until January, or should they get a K10d now?

[Ray Pulley]

Since you asked, I will answer that I did, in fact, sell all of my Pentax AF-digital SLR gear and moved to a different system. Pentax didn't have what I needed in a digital SLR system, and I got tired of waiting for a long fast lens with decent AF speed. Instead, I bought a Nikon DSLR with three lenses and a hot shoe flash to replace the Pentax gear. Nikon had what I needed at present and Pentax did not, so I switched. (I still have and use my Pentax LX film camera and some manual focus lenses which perform well for landscape and travel photography.)

I have been happily shooting away at my son's soccer games with a long fast lens and the AF is getting it right about 98% of the time. This is a dramatic improvement from my prior K10D and Sigma 100-300mm f4 EX DG. Nikon also has superior performance and flexibility in the flash system, and I no longer get the weird incorrect flash exposures I used to get on occasion with the K10D and AF-360FGZ flash. I also get fast and accurate AF performance in low light that I didn't get with the K10D. And the build quality of some of the Nikkor zoom lenses I have (e.g., the 70-200mm f2.8 VR and the 17-55mm f2.8 DX) is better than any Pentax zoom in the current catalog (including the DA* lenses).

Yes, it did cost me some money both for the loss in value in buying new and selling used, and in the higher prices that Nikon charges for some products. But for me it was worth the cost.

I think everyone benefits from having companies like Pentax and Leica stay in business and offer alternatives for specialized markets. More options and more competition benefit all photographers. If my needs change in the future, and Pentax has a better product for those needs than Nikon, Canon or Olympus alternatives (NOT Sony), then I may buy Pentax. I'm not interested in the newest gimmicks (e.g., swivel LCD panels, in-camera photo editing, scene modes, etc.). But I am interested in build quality, solid performance, and the choice of equipment to meet my needs.

I am genuinely happy to hear of someone who was willing to move on when they found the product did not serve their needs. However, it does beg the question of why you would continue to carp on the issue on a Pentax only forum.....?

I am surprised that you would lose any money on your Pentax gear, as from what I have seen, anything lost on the body can be more than made up for on the lenses, assuming you had a decent set. However, that is the way of technology and would be no different for Canon or Nikon.

You also should be reminded that you made a serious step up when you went to the lenses you chose in the Nikon outfit, which makes your comparison hardly apples to apples. You also dented your pocketbook by a significant digit or two more, I am sure.

BTW, I agree that Nikon seems to have the best flash automation, and is better at AF than Pentax, and for action shooting, that is important. Canon seems to have the rep for AF speed however, although I have no personal experience with that one way or another.

Regardless of where CaNikon is now in terms of superiority on things like flash automation and AF, you should do a bit of searching on the woes of the Canon and Nikon flash and AF systems from not too far in the past. As big as they are and regardless of all the resources they could bring to bear upon the problems, both Canon and Nikon have had serious systematic issues in the areas of flash and AF in the past (Canon's current flash system is ETTL-II for a reason and many still hate it). While many will not admit it, there are still issues with AF on both brands. Check the BrandX forums sometime for some entertaining reading about one Nikon lens not focusing properly while others do and also for focusing issues on the very expensive Canon FF bodies. It was also entertaining to watch people wait up to a year after a certain Nikon lens was announced before they received one.

As for the Nikon lenses being superior to the new DA* stuff from Pentax, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I think the best of the Pentax lens offerings is as good or better than anything you can get anywhere else.

However, I do wonder at times how we ever took a decent photo before AF and i-TTL......

Ray

[TDN]

Hmm, I have a double feeling about all this.

you'd think Pentax would have learned their lesson releasing the K10D after christmas last year, and that this time they would apply some smart marketing.

Why do you think Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus and even Leica/Panasonic all released plans for a new DSLR at the end of the summer? It's a simple fact that people buy stuff for the holidays. And again, Pentax is going to fall right out of that very important time of the year.

And yes, Pentax has always had a different philosophy, that they want to deliver good quality products instead of just another marketing hype. But bad marketing strategy gets a company bankrupted!
Besides, the competition does apply these marketing techniques, and can you honestly say Nikon for example doesn't make quality products?

I'm excited about a new body (or bodies), and I'm sure that as usual, it will be a very good product, as we are used to getting from Pentax. But I really think the timing could be a lot better...they won't lose true customers, but they will miss out on the potential new ones that get a camera for christmas...

just my 2 cents...

Tom

edit: As an answer to "Why do you stay with Pentax then?" I say: because I love the way I can experiment with over 10 different focal lengths and several fast prime lenses without even spending 1000$! Let's see Canon or Nikon do that

---

Last edited by TDN; 10-12-2007 at 02:22 PM.

[PaulAndAPentax]

Hmm, I have a double feeling about all this.

you'd think Pentax would have learned their lesson releasing the K10D after christmas last year, and that this time they would apply some smart marketing.

Why do you think Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus and even Leica/Panasonic all released plans for a new DSLR at the end of the summer? It's a simple fact that people buy stuff for the holidays. And again, Pentax is going to fall right out of that very important time of the year.

And yes, Pentax has always had a different philosophy, that they want to deliver good quality products instead of just another marketing hype. But bad marketing strategy gets a company bankrupted!
Besides, the competition does apply these marketing techniques, and can you honestly say Nikon for example doesn't make quality products?

I'm excited about a new body (or bodies), and I'm sure that as usual, it will be a very good product, as we are used to getting from Pentax. But I really think the timing could be a lot better...they won't lose true customers, but they will miss out on the potential new ones that get a camera for christmas...

just my 2 cents...

Tom

I think you are right if you're introducing a point and shoot camera. But I don't think the sales for $1000 plus cameras are up there with other consumer products such as $150.00 Zunes, Ipods, and stereos. These things, I feel, would sell better in spring as people anticipate vacations and have paid off their Christmas debt. Most people for Christmas have to buy multiple gifts and ration their funds. Only small portions of people are going to spend $1000 plus for a dSLR during the holidays. I could be wrong, but I don't think so in this case. A $300 dSLR, maybe. But a pro model, nah, not during the holidays.

[jeffkrol]

I think you are right if you're introducing a point and shoot camera. But I don't think the sales for $1000 plus cameras are up there with other consumer products such as $150.00 Zunes, Ipods, and stereos. These things, I feel, would sell better in spring as people anticipate vacations and have paid off their Christmas debt. Most people for Christmas have to buy multiple gifts and ration their funds. Only small portions of people are going to spend $1000 plus for a dSLR during the holidays. I could be wrong, but I don't think so in this case. A $300 dSLR, maybe. But a pro model, nah, not during the holidays.

Another thing not mentioned here (though in other places/times it has been) the "home market" (Japan) is not really as influenced by December as the Euro/US market. So a shopping season deadline is not critical..... And I will assume Hoya-tax wants to beef up the home market (Pentax stronghold) before worring about "the rest"...

[GeoffreyS]

I understand that there are those few out there for whom 10 MP isn't enough, but come on... how many of us are making prints bigger than 16x20 anyways? Better high ISO performance would be something just about everyone would welcome and appreciate, whereas more MP is just pointless for many. (I would actually be happy with FEWER megapixels, to keep the file sizes down).

Wow, if there aren't any photographers trying to sell their 26x24" and larger fine art prints that must be quite the gig to get into; no competition and everything. Gee, wonder why it's so tough to get a foot into that industry?

Seriously, though, I personally have no need for high ISO, and I think most pro landscape and nature photographers like me are interested in getting the highest resolution possible without lugging an LF into the back country.

If Pentax is at all interested in this "rarified" market in the face of higher-resolution full-frame offerings that are only getting closer to actually being worth the price tags and weight they carry, they better get going. They're losing so much right now because guys like me are on the fence about purchasing any new gear.

---

Last edited by GeoffreyS; 10-12-2007 at 04:41 PM. Reason: Don't know how to use quote box

[jeffkrol]

Not that it really fits here but some interesting comments by Kodak... Yes, new lenses ARE important...
Digital SLR cameras are not worth making, says Kodak; Firm continues to focus on mass market compacts and post-capture products such as digital picture frames news - Amateur Photographer - news, camera reviews, lens reviews, camera equipment guides,

[GaryML]

I really respect your decission and I think that it is what many people not happy with their system/company should do. Actually, I like the fact of having people moving to another system without starting "jumping ship" threads. I just have a question. Did your priorities change after getting Pentax or you just trusted the Pentax roadmap? I ask you that because it might be a good lesson from your experience: "if you wanna buy from a (relatively) small company, do it only based on the existing products, if they dont fit you now it might not worth it"

The usual story: I bought my first Pentax SLR years ago, and had a bunch of good quality film equipment. When I saw the *istDL for $600 with kit lens, I though I'd give digital a try, and make some use of my old lenses and flash. At the time, I was 100% happy with manual focus and AF speed was totally unimportant.

My interest in sports photography came somewhat later as my son's soccer ability developed. At first, I used my old M*300 f/4 on the *ist DL with manual focus and manual exposure. I would get a few outstanding shots, but many were out of focus and improperly exposed. That lens has about 270 degrees of travel in going from close focus to infinity. It's great for precision focusing, but not so great for speed. And as the light changed on the field I would forget to re-meter in M mode.

So my quest began to get the right lens and the right body for reliable AF for the soccer games. I wanted to stay with Pentax since I had invested in a fair amount in new gear for other things and it made sense to stick with Pentax. I spent a lot of time and money trying to get it to work correctly. But after trying Canon and Nikon and using their AF systems, it was clear that it was best for me to switch. I ended up going to Nikon as the body control was pretty close to the K10D. I also do a fair amount of macro, and their macro gear (flash and lenses) are the best in the business. The clincher was the 70-200mm f2.8 VR, which is the best-built (and most expensive!) lens that I have ever owned. It's like a Pentax FA Limited lens on steriods.

In all honesty, if I never tried to do sports action photography I probably would have stuck with Pentax and lived with the other (relatively minor) issues I mentioned. Some things Pentax does better than the competition, and I really love some of their lenses like the DA 12-24mm, the D FA 50mm Macro, the DA* 50-135mm and the FA 77mm Limited.

[anomaly]

My my isn't this exciting...

[GaryML]

I am genuinely happy to hear of someone who was willing to move on when they found the product did not serve their needs. However, it does beg the question of why you would continue to carp on the issue on a Pentax only forum.....?

You are right and I should probably move on. But I still have an interest in Pentax gear and a bit of knowledge from having used their film equipment for over 18 years and their digital equipment for about 2 years. And I know that Pentax employees sometimes read the posts in this and similar forums, and I think they should know how customers react to their products.

I am surprised that you would lose any money on your Pentax gear, as from what I have seen, anything lost on the body can be more than made up for on the lenses, assuming you had a decent set. However, that is the way of technology and would be no different for Canon or Nikon.

Some items like lenses were mostly break even. I actually profited on a few lenses that are no longer sold and worth more used than the new price. The camera bodies, on the other hand, depreciate in value, both from use and from the fact that the prices of new ones drop over time. I think I did well in the sale of the Pentax gear, and it has held it's value pretty well.

You also should be reminded that you made a serious step up when you went to the lenses you chose in the Nikon outfit, which makes your comparison hardly apples to apples. You also dented your pocketbook by a significant digit or two more, I am sure.

BTW, I agree that Nikon seems to have the best flash automation, and is better at AF than Pentax, and for action shooting, that is important. Canon seems to have the rep for AF speed however, although I have no personal experience with that one way or another.

Yes, the Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR and 17-55 f2.8 DX are high end "pro" lenses with the weight and price tag to match. They are, in fact, just about the most expensive lenses available in their focal lengths (except for Leica, perhaps). I certainly could have gotten about 95% of the performance for about half the price with "consumer" class lenses. But I'm getting on in years and I feel like my time has come to get the best, and I recently had a big surge in my business that gave me the extra revenue to pay for this indulgence. I also opted for the high-end SB800 flash to replace my mid-range AF-360FGZ flash. So yes, a large part of the cost to switch was the choice to upgrade.

Regardless of where CaNikon is now in terms of superiority on things like flash automation and AF, you should do a bit of searching on the woes of the Canon and Nikon flash and AF systems from not too far in the past.

Nothing is perfect and Nikon and Canon have their issues as well. I read many complaints about various things on places like dpreview. I think the Nikon AF is an improvement over what I had, but I don't expect that I'll never have bad focus or other problems.

As for the Nikon lenses being superior to the new DA* stuff from Pentax, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I think the best of the Pentax lens offerings is as good or better than anything you can get anywhere else.

I said specifically that the build quality of the Nikkors is superior. For example, the Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR has a metal outer body, metal zoom ring with the focal lengths engraved on the ring, a removable metal foot on the tripod mount with a nice dovetail and locking knob, a rubber ring around the filter threads to prevent dents, and a lens hood with a locking lever to keep it from turning when mounted, and a number of other similar nice details. I had a DA* 50-135mm f2.8 and it is a very fine lens. But it has a plastic body and just a bit lower quality of construction. So in terms of the physical build, I'd say that the Nikkor is built better than the DA* 50-135mm. It should be, since it costs twice as much and weighs twice as much!

Optically, both the DA* 50-135mm f2.8 and the Nikkor 70-200mm f2/8 are outstanding. I never did any direct comparison testing and they have different focal ranges. My general impression is that the Nikkor is a bit better, especially at the long end, but that is just a subjective evaluation and different cameras were used with each lens, of course. The SDM on the DA* 50-135mm works great and it is probably a bit quieter than the Nikkor. I couldn't really say if the VR in the Nikon system works better than the SR in the Pentax system, since I haven't used the Nikon VR very much yet.

Sorry to have hi-jacked this thread. We now return to the regularly scheduled discussion of the BIG EVENT in January.

[Ray Pulley]

You are right and I should probably move on.

Yes, the Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR and 17-55 f2.8 DX are high end "pro" lenses with the weight and price tag to match. They are, in fact, just about the most expensive lenses available in their focal lengths (except for Leica, perhaps). I certainly could have gotten about 95% of the performance for about half the price with "consumer" class lenses. But I'm getting on in years and I feel like my time has come to get the best, and I recently had a big surge in my business that gave me the extra revenue to pay for this indulgence. I also opted for the high-end SB800 flash to replace my mid-range AF-360FGZ flash. So yes, a large part of the cost to switch was the choice to upgrade.



Nothing is perfect and Nikon and Canon have their issues as well. I read many complaints about various things on places like dpreview. I think the Nikon AF is an improvement over what I had, but I don't expect that I'll never have bad focus or other problems.



I said specifically that the build quality of the Nikkors is superior. For example, the Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR has a metal outer body, metal zoom ring with the focal lengths engraved on the ring, a removable metal foot on the tripod mount with a nice dovetail and locking knob, a rubber ring around the filter threads to prevent dents, and a lens hood with a locking lever to keep it from turning when mounted, and a number of other similar nice details. I had a DA* 50-135mm f2.8 and it is a very fine lens. But it has a plastic body and just a bit lower quality of construction. So in terms of the physical build, I'd say that the Nikkor is built better than the DA* 50-135mm. It should be, since it costs twice as much and weighs twice as much!

Optically, both the DA* 50-135mm f2.8 and the Nikkor 70-200mm f2/8 are outstanding. I never did any direct comparison testing and they have different focal ranges. My general impression is that the Nikkor is a bit better, especially at the long end, but that is just a subjective evaluation and different cameras were used with each lens, of course. The SDM on the DA* 50-135mm works great and it is probably a bit quieter than the Nikkor. I couldn't really say if the VR in the Nikon system works better than the SR in the Pentax system, since I haven't used the Nikon VR very much yet.

Sorry to have hi-jacked this thread. We now return to the regularly scheduled discussion of the BIG EVENT in January.

It's your time and an open forum, so do whatever you want. Clearly you are not in the same class of folks (like RH) who cannot move on for more negative reasons. They are very annoying.

You are correct in that you did say the build quality was superior, but at the price premium, it should be, right?

BTW, I will put my ltd primes and the FA 50 f1.4 up against any prime made by Nikon or Canon any day, and although I do not currently own either lens, I would stack the FA* 80-200 f2.8 and FA* 28-70 f2.8 up against any similar Nikon or Canon zoom as well, and yes both are metal body designs as you probably know.

I have also handled CaNikon camera bodies that compete with the K100D and K10D, and Pentax fit, feel and ergonomics win hands down over the large plasticky feel of the other brands (especially Canon), IMO.

Frankly, I am not one who automatically assumes that a metal body is better than a polymer design, and I am sure that both materials have pluses and minuses, but regardless, my DA* zooms will be in on Monday and I will have plenty of time to put them to work while I await the promised new stuff from Pentax!

Ray

[Cideway]

you'd think Pentax would have learned their lesson releasing the K10D after christmas last year, and that this time they would apply some smart marketing.

The K10D was out before Christmas, I got mine in November.

[GaryML]

It's your time and an open forum, so do whatever you want. Clearly you are not in the same class of folks (like RH) who cannot move on for more negative reasons. They are very annoying.

You are correct in that you did say the build quality was superior, but at the price premium, it should be, right?

BTW, I will put my ltd primes and the FA 50 f1.4 up against any prime made by Nikon or Canon any day, and although I do not currently own either lens, I would stack the FA* 80-200 f2.8 and FA* 28-70 f2.8 up against any similar Nikon or Canon zoom as well, and yes both are metal body designs as you probably know.

I have also handled CaNikon camera bodies that compete with the K100D and K10D, and Pentax fit, feel and ergonomics win hands down over the large plasticky feel of the other brands (especially Canon), IMO.

Frankly, I am not one who automatically assumes that a metal body is better than a polymer design, and I am sure that both materials have pluses and minuses, but regardless, my DA* zooms will be in on Monday and I will have plenty of time to put them to work while I await the promised new stuff from Pentax!

I agree that the Limited lenses are unique. I would also say that the DA 14mm f2.8 is in a class by itself, with nothing comparable from any other manufacturer. I loved that lens and I sometimes regretted replacing it with the DA 12-24.

I also don't care much for the low end bodies like the Rebel XTi or the Nikon D40/x. But once you move up the price ladder past the K10D, you can get a nice feeling camera like the D200 or the 30D. I'm sure the new models (D300 and 40D) will be nice as well (as will the new high-end Pentax model if and when it is available). One thing I hate about the Nikon body is the rubber covers on all of the connectors. I much prefer the Pentax doors with the rubber seals. It's not a big deal, but the rubber squish-on covers just feel nasty.

Most of the short primes from Nikon and Canon are old designs and not very interesting. The only exceptions are Canon's 50mm f1.2 and 85mm f1.2, but they carry hefty price tags of $1400 and $1800 respectively. Nikon has updated just the longer primes, starting with the 105mm Micro VR and the 200mm f2 VR ($4000!). All the big prime lenses are getting VR and updated coatings to compete with the Canon big IS lenses.

The Pentax FA* f2.8 zooms compared with the Nikon pro and Canon L lenses at the time, but they are now discontinued. With some modest upgrading (e.g., Quickshift focusing) they would still be contenders. However, Pentax choose the discontinue all FA* lenses.

I realize that metal bodies may not perform as well as good quality plastic. But they sure feel nice in the hands! That is part of the appeal of the Limited lenses and the DA 14mm f2.8.

Enjoy those new DA* lenses, and I hope Pentax can get some of their brethren out the door in January!

[FotoPete]

Haha I saw the Nikkor 200mm f2 today at a local camera show. And you thought Olympus's 150mm f2 (equiv to 300mm f2) was pushing the limits.