[barondla]

Sorry to see the sponsorship go. It does sell cameras. I have even taken people to Ben's website to help sell cameras. Just like people seeing all the pros with the big lenses on the side lines shooting. People don't even have to know who the photographer is for it to sell cameras. They just associate the brand with something good enough for pros to use.
Glad Benjikan is staying on the forum with us. His images and knowledge really add to the place. Never seen a more sharing pro photographer. Thanks Ben.
Wouldn't be so quick to laugh at people who pick their camera gear by what the pros use. It could make as much sense as doing lots of research to pick the perfect camera. Face it, all dslrs can take pretty decent pics ( especially if you read the spec sheet). Seeing people actually making a living with a piece of equipment tells you that the equipment is capable enough. You can't always get that info from the spec sheet or by ticking all the features off. Many amatuers know that shooting sports at the top pro level would require big lenses. They know this because they observed pros doing it. They also know a pro isn't going to shoot a wedding with a P&S. Observation is a great way to learn.
thanks
barondla
Not a bit surprised that Ben sees that many people a day who study what camera equipment he uses. I am a lowly instructor of a photo class. People, on the street, constantly ask me what to buy. With Ben magnify that 100 times.
thanks
barondla

[SLC Flyfishing]

Well then that individual is a complete idiot, and no that IS NOT the consumers mind set. Especially if you are talking about the serious amerature. Your tremendous ego is skewing your view.

Dude, no one is arguing with you that making a purchase choice based on who else uses the product or what the adverts say is the wrong way to do it. But the fact remains that there are many many people who do just that (perhaps even the majority), and Pentax should learn to capitalize on that fact so they can grow the brand.

SGT, It's not Ben's ego, it's what happened with a bystander at the magazine shoot. Why does that get you so excited? I'd have thought that this sort of thing would be obvious and common knowledge for nearly everyone.

SLC

[benjikan]

Look...While at the shoot, a very wealthy producer told me that he had just purchased the Nikon D300. He looked at me while I was changing lenses and said "Pentax? Why?" I said because the K20D is one of the best DSLR's on the market right now. I mean my sponsorship had ended. I could have rented a "..Blad" for this shoot. A Canon 1Ds Mklll or a Nikon D3. What for? At about 15 million pixels, with great lenses and very nice ergonomics, I chose to use this brand for this very important shoot.

Now if anyone at "Pentax" reads this, don't even think of quoting me here for commercial or press purposes. I am sure you get my meaning...

None the less, that is what happened.

Ben

[chals]

Hi Ben and others,

This was bad news, it proves that Pentax from no on always will be political correct. Very boring. And no full frame either! The future is dull for Pentax. I have attached a picture from this months Pentax fashion shootout.


Cato

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[benjikan]

Hi Ben and others,

This was bad news, it proves that Pentax from no on always will be political correct. Very boring. And no full frame either! The future is dull for Pentax. I have attached a picture from this months Pentax fashion shootout.


Cato

Nice...I would definately vote for that...You get 5 stars!!!

Ben

[filmamigo]

MY guess is that the majority of the uninformed purchasers seek the guidance of sales professionals. Why the sales pros push Canon and Nikon over Pentax is beyond me, maybe margins? (Many photo outlets do not even carry Pentax) I still stand by my original statement "Anyone who purchases a $1000+ camera based on that really needs to re-think their process."

It's called the path of least resistance.

There is a saying in the corporate IT world -- "nobody ever got fired for picking Microsoft." That attitude costs the corporate world dearly, in license fees, in maintenance costs, and in opportunity-cost. But the saying is still true.

It goes the same for camera stores. Why suggest a camera/system that MIGHT be great, but MIGHT generate a complaint somewhere down the line because you dared suggest something that wasn't COMPLETELY normative.

It's funny because the people who choose anything outside the market leader are invariably described as cultish. The people who follow the path of least resistance are "smart."

I think 99% of camera buyers know that they are over their heads. Heck, I know that was the case for me when I started out. So, you aren't really buying a camera, you are looking for a recommendation, often trusting the sales folks, to steer you towards the right team. No one wants to be the last guy who bought a BetaMax, right?

EDIT -- also wanted to say, thanks Ben, you have always been an informative straight shooter. Looking forward to reading anything else you write, Pentax or otherwise.

[little laker]

If I would have gotten a Canon instead of a Pentax I would have paid more initially, gone broke buying lenses, and still not have half the system I have now.

My guess is that my shots today would all be very bland, due to the inferior lens quality that I'd be limited to because of the price.

However I'd have the respect of other photographers while walking down the street. Just not those whom had seen my work.

Now I've earned the respect of everyone who has seen my work, and they accept me as a Pentax / Sigma shooter.

I still get snubbed by some people on the street, which often gives me a good chuckle Knowing that there's a good chance my photographs will be better than theirs when I get home and download them

I should mention that I don't get snubbed while shooting the Sigma, it seems to intimidate those same people at times

[WMBP]

If I would have gotten a Canon instead of a Pentax I would have paid more initially, gone broke buying lenses, and still not have half the system I have now.

My guess is that my shots today would all be very bland, due to the inferior lens quality that I'd be limited to because of the price.

Money is why I would probably go with Pentax again, if I were starting over.

But if money were no object...

However I'd have the respect of other photographers while walking down the street. Just not those whom had seen my work.

Now I've earned the respect of everyone who has seen my work, and they accept me as a Pentax / Sigma shooter.

This is a fair and correct point, although it's not surprising. I'm not sure that other folks RESPECT a photographer for having Canon or Nikon. It's just that they know those brand names, the brands have a nice vibe to them, and folks like to be social and show that they know you're using what they assume is really good equipment. Perhaps they assume that it's really good because they have a Canon or Nikon point and shoot at home, and it flatters them to think that they're using the same brand of gear as the folks who shoot for National Geographic and Sports Illustrated. I understand this.

But this fact - that folks will admire your photos when they see them, but think badly of you for carrying Pentax gear around - does hurt Pentax. And I'm not sure what they can do about it. Spend more on advertising.

I should mention that I don't get snubbed while shooting the Sigma, it seems to intimidate those same people at times

Although I don't have a Sigma to shoot with, I've noticed the same thing indirectly. Sigma and Olympus both seem to have very positive brand vibes, while Pentax, I dunno, may sound "old" to some folks who don't know any better. A friend of mine who really likes my photos and who asked me for advice before making a purchase last year, ended up buying an Olympus rather than the Pentax that I recommended. I understand his decision. He shopped the way all of us shop to a greater or lesser degree: by looking at the gear specifications. I think he decided that my photos are good because I'm (every now and then) a good photographer, and I'd take good photos with any camera. I hope that he's right about that, of course. But that thought liberated him to pick the piece of equipment that he found more interesting. Needless to say, he WILL be able to take fine photos with his Oly and I'm glad he got it because I've now been able to play with an Olympus myself.

But the point is that, the Pentax brand right now is boring. I'm talking about the brand, not the cameras. They make cameras that are better, especially at the price, which is great for all of us who really care about photography and image quality and boring stuff like that and who aren't millionaires. But they don't make cameras that are different, and regrettably, it's different that generates excitement. Canon and Nikon aren't different, either, in the areas where Pentax competes with them. But they are different in other areas: in the point and shoot market, Canon makes a ton of really attractive cameras, and of course they now both have full-frame offerings, too. But they don't even NEED to be different. They've got inertia - market dominance is largely self-perpetuating - on their side. Pentax has neither inertia NOR sex-appeal, just quality. There's a way to sell quality, but, well, you have to make it sexy. And for that, you need a better marketing department....

Will

[MRRiley]

Hopefully marketing will improve since Pentax Imaging of America has hired RPA. This won't help Europe or Asia obviously, but if RPA is successful in the US the marketing model may be adopted company wide. Of course, we've yet to see anything out of RPA but I am cautiously optimistic that they'll come up with something interesting and appealing.

p.s. Stu... whats so intimidating about the Sigma? LOL

[JMS]

Ben,

Sorry to see you parting ways with Pentax in an official capacity. We know you love the cameras and surely you'll shoot with them when appropriate. Best of luck regardless.

Now...



I will repeat once again (for the millionth time...)...

PENTAX CAN SHOOT SPORTS!

Just about any modern DSLR is superior to the film cameras used in the 70s when it comes to frame rates and autofocus. The only things that Pentax doesnt have for the sports shooter are high frame rates and a superior motion tracking auto-focus system. This does make things tougher but it is not insurmountable. Please note, that to get those features in a Canon or Nikon you have to spend at least twice what a K20D costs. If you are an experienced sports shooter, you can shoot sports with a Holga. The high end CaNikons just make it easier to some extent.

This shot was done with an even less capable camera than the K10D... my K110D...



Now, tell me "Pentax doesn't support things like sports"...

I'll admit that I don't have any experience shooting "unaugmented human" sports such as football or basketball, but the K110D and the K10D do just fine with bicycle, motorcycle and automotive sports/racing. Knowing your subject, preplanning and careful shooting are more important than just blasting away at 8FPS. Much more and you might as well just shoot video...

Of course, Pentax does not go after the sport shooter market, much less sponsor a sports photographer, but that doesn't mean the cameras cannot get into the arena...

I shoot track with my K100D (for the record, I never use Burst mode), and I've found that its autofocus system just isn't quite enough for things moving towards and from the camera. So, mainly I use the "trap focus" mode. My main problem, though, is that there's almost no reasonable upgrade path at present. Pentax's longest pro zoom lens only goes to 135mm. That just isn't enough.

I've found that, yes, Pentaxians get very defensive. There's no reason for that. Pentaxes do a lot of things very well, and, with the right lens, they do sports well. The problem is, the right lenses aren't in production. I have to go back AT LEAST 10 years to find a telezoom that suits my needs- no-one's getting rid of their FA* 80-200mm f2.8. And, it isn't in production. Same deal with all the other tele lenses that would be great for sports. Pentax is just starting to come back, with the new DA* lenses.

I'm not asking for 278fps. I'm just asking for a bit better AF, and the lenses to go with it.

[SLC Flyfishing]

I've found that, yes, Pentaxians get very defensive. There's no reason for that.

If I get defensive, it's only because I'm tired of hearing people poo poo my choice of gear. Again, it's nothing for me to take seriously, but I'm sick and tired of hearing all this talk of "x and y brands are the only ones that have a suitable upgrade path" well we all know that that only matters if you are going to upgrade to name brand professional grade superzooms and long tele primes (both of which will arrive with time from Pentax as long as there's a market and demand for them). I shoot all my shots in focal lengths that are well represented in Pentax optics, both primes and zooms so where's this upgrade path that someone like me needs that Pentax can't offer? Yet people will still speak in absolute terms when saying Canon and Nikon offer the only complete upgrade path. It's like they've got tunnel vision and think that everyone that buys a DSLR needs a 600mm f/2.8 lens or a frame rate of at least 7 frames per second.

I'd argue that for my (and my wife's) uses, there isn't a better system on the market. But of course if I defend my position with any Canon or Nikon fans, I'd be labeled as a defensive cultist.

Come on JMS, you know as well as I do that there are just as many defensive people using other brands. In fact, it's them getting defensive when others don't agree with their blanket statements about what everyone else needs that happen more often than not from what I've seen. Just post a thread about how there's no Canikon equivalent to a FA limited lens over at the other forum and see what happens. Even better, post a thread about how you don't think Dell computers are worth it (the idea is to cast what certain people use in a less than perfect light) you'll be flamed out before the day's over.

SLC

[MRRiley]

I shoot track with my K100D (for the record, I never use Burst mode), and I've found that its autofocus system just isn't quite enough for things moving towards and from the camera. So, mainly I use the "trap focus" mode. My main problem, though, is that there's almost no reasonable upgrade path at present. Pentax's longest pro zoom lens only goes to 135mm. That just isn't enough.

I've found that, yes, Pentaxians get very defensive. There's no reason for that. Pentaxes do a lot of things very well, and, with the right lens, they do sports well. The problem is, the right lenses aren't in production. I have to go back AT LEAST 10 years to find a telezoom that suits my needs- no-one's getting rid of their FA* 80-200mm f2.8. And, it isn't in production. Same deal with all the other tele lenses that would be great for sports. Pentax is just starting to come back, with the new DA* lenses.

I'm not asking for 278fps. I'm just asking for a bit better AF, and the lenses to go with it.

True the K100D/K110D autofocus isn't anything to brag about, but will work if you know the limitations. The K10D's autofocus is "better" but still not perfect. I havn't tried a K20D yet so can make no claims either way. I certainly hear you about the lack of long fast zooms. They are as rare as hens teeth and thrice as expensive but they do exist. That motorcycle shot, by the way, was shot with the plain old DA 50-200. Not a spectacular lens, but again if you know it's limitations you can get great shots. Now, would I love to have a big fast white 100-400mm f2.8? Sure I would. We all would...

And, an explanation... I didn't mean to get defensive. It just gets really tiring to hear even Pentax users saying "you can't shoot sports with Pentax!" It just aint so!

[jake.astig]

Pentax is a small company with a small marketing budget, compared to Canon Nikon and Sony. They can't really go with a "me too plus we're cheaper" approach. Doesn't do the brand and the equipment justice. Pentax needs to stand out and be different.

Ben's strategy of rebuilding the brand as THE fashion camera is sound and would have positioned Pentax in a small but very influential niche. Fashion has not been claimed by either Canon or Nikon. It would have been a perfect opportunity for Pentax to own the niche. Owning fashion would associate Pentax as the tool to capture beauty and creativity in all its myriad incarnations.

And, an explanation... I didn't mean to get defensive. It just gets really tiring to hear even Pentax users saying "you can't shoot sports with Pentax!" It just aint so!

I think that we might have a problem of "dynamic range" in the interpretation of our posts and/or the way we express them. I think that when somebody (and in this case I will personalize on me) says "this or this is better suited for sports" or "this or this have a more complete system" doesnt mean that the other systems are dreadful, it is just that some others are better suited to the tasks or simply have more variety (more propietary lenses, more 3rd party lenses, more variety of accesories like ring flash...). Then is the price issue which I think that each one has its own interpretation. And then is the ergonomics, aesthetics, IQ where systems like Pentax are simply too difficult to beat ... The problem that I usually found when I point out some of those aspects is that people interpret my posts like attacks to the Pentax systems and automatically thinks that I dont like the system at all. Alternatively, I might be the one that doesnt know how to express myself and give a better "dynamic range" to the argument and by using some expressions it looks like I am trying to prevent people from buying into Pentax or that I am calling them idiots for buying something that sucks (which it is not my intention). As a consequence, I see some replies to my posts and I also interpret them in my own way with a mixture of "why are they attacking me for pointing out something that I dont think that it is so bad?" and "that is not what I was trying to say". This usually set me (and I have seen many others also) in an agressive/deffensive mode and it end up being a senseless discussion where it looks like the most important thing is being the one that says the last word.

[little laker]

p.s. Stu... whats so intimidating about the Sigma? LOL

It's really only around the same size as the K20D, and if I remember a touch lighter.
Plus looking at it all that you see are some very basic controls.

It appears that most people just don't realize that Sigma makes a consumer grade camera.
So I almost think that they feel I must be a high priced pro while shooting it.