[Zygonyx]

Yes, but in the meantime Fuji X mount has no access to Sigma or Samyang primes in the way K mount has.
There is no >240mm tele.
No assess to legacy lenses without adaptor.
Poor battery performance.
You are stuck with your in-body Jpegs if you want something correct, and RAW filess are awfull or soft-limited to rework...
And don't speak about ergonomy, ruggedness of bodies, and lens flare...
There's an incredible hype for the Fuji X system, which besides high prices, is not convincing many re. compactness as a system.

---

Last edited by Zygonyx; 09-16-2014 at 02:14 AM.

[D1N0]

Some people are not objective on this forum when they look around at options today.

Yeah they are talking about other systems as walhalla while Pentax is just lame. Grass is always greener. I suggest people who think they own the wrong gear sell theirs and stop whining about it.

[Nicolas06]

ogl speaks the truth. Take a look at Fuji as of late. They will have a pair of fast weather sealed premium zooms to add within a year as well. Pentax limited's are nice lenses but Fuji has Pentax beat on primes.

Come on they have a lot of fast wides... Something that is half useless anyway as you can't really achieve good shallow deph of field 23mm or less on APSC. We could do with 1 fast wide for thoses that really can't live without it. And that finished.

And that's all they have. Want to make some portraits? Nothing past 60mm for now (and f/2.4 only), otherwise that 50mm. They think to have a 90mm f/2 on their road map but it is not here. Where is the common 70mm focal lens? Nowhere ! Where is decent macro lens? People there ask for 200 or 180mm macro lens... Fuji as 60mm !

Where are the tele? I can have a 200 or 300mm prime, and very nice one. Here there nothing !

Fuji is 10 years late in the APSC echosystem and they didn't start with a nice offer a FF lens to compensate. You can invest on Fuji... So in 5 years maybe it is good if they don't change mount or you can invest in Canon, Nikon or Pentax and have something that works now.

And don't forget to ask they to go FF! If Pentax is doomed, Fuji is already in hell.

[LeeRunge]

I suggest people who think they own the wrong gear sell theirs and stop whining about it.

Can't point out nice things other brands are coming up with? Why jump ship, I'd just buy both or wait for Pentax to catch up.

---------- Post added 09-16-2014 at 03:58 AM ----------

Come on they have a lot of fast wides... Something that is half useless anyway as you can't really achieve good shallow deph of field 23mm or less on APSC. We could do with 1 fast wide for thoses that really can't live without it. And that finished.

And that's all they have. Want to make some portraits? Nothing past 60mm for now (and f/2.4 only), otherwise that 50mm. They think to have a 90mm f/2 on their road map but it is not here. Where is the common 70mm focal lens? Nowhere ! Where is decent macro lens? People there ask for 200 or 180mm macro lens... Fuji as 60mm !

Where are the tele? I can have a 200 or 300mm prime, and very nice one. Here there nothing !

Fuji is 10 years late in the APSC echosystem and they didn't start with a nice offer a FF lens to compensate. You can invest on Fuji... So in 5 years maybe it is good if they don't change mount or you can invest in Canon, Nikon or Pentax and have something that works now.

And don't forget to ask they to go FF! If Pentax is doomed, Fuji is already in hell.

I'm not a telephoto guy. If that were my priority for birding or sports I'd be using a Nikon or Canon as they have a better telephoto lineup and AF/lens motors. I use 55mm or less 90% of the time. I'm not brand loyal whatsoever.

I bought Pentax for the DA* 16-50 and 60-250mm specifically for the WR. At the time I needed a DSLR for use in Afghanistan with good weather resistance (it did this very well with a few exceptions like overheating). Canon and Nikon sealed lenses are only in the top end and are VERY expensive compared to Pentax. This is still true today.

[Alizarine]

well so far Pentax has indeed made true one of the predictions here: a K-mount lens.

[johnmflores]

This is all little more than bench racing, crowing about this car's or that car's 0-60mph times or skidpad numbers. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is results. If you can't get the results that you want with Pentax then maybe you should consider supplementing or replacing. It's just a camera. It's just a brand.

Life's too short to be unhappy with your hobby, unless, of course, your hobby IS to be unhappy.

[cali92rs]

Something that is half useless anyway as you can't really achieve good shallow deph of field 23mm or less on APSC.

You can't achieve shallow depth of field with a 23mm lens? Do you have proof of this or just regurgitating some misguided statements you have read on the internet?

Do a flickr seach of 23mm f1.4 and let me know how useless that lens is and how impossible it is to achieve shallow DOF with it.

---

Last edited by cali92rs; 09-16-2014 at 10:13 AM.

[LeeRunge]

This is all little more than bench racing, crowing about this car's or that car's 0-60mph times or skidpad numbers. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is results. If you can't get the results that you want with Pentax then maybe you should consider supplementing or replacing. It's just a camera. It's just a brand.

Life's too short to be unhappy with your hobby, unless, of course, your hobby IS to be unhappy.

Your absolutely correct. (Jealous of your MC testing btw, I'm an avid motorcyclist (Moto Guzzi).

In the end I get excited for other brands advancements because that will likely trickle to the next Pentax release which will work with my lenses. I'm quite happy shooting with my now 4 year old K-5 and have no plans to replace it unless a huge leap forward in tech happens. Seeing Fuji or other brands advance will only push Pentax to do the same which is good for all of us.

---------- Post added 09-16-2014 at 12:53 PM ----------

You can't achieve shallow depth of field with a 23mm lens? Do you have proof of this or just regurgitating some misguided statements you have read on the internet?

Do a flickr seach of 23mm f1.4 and let me know how useless that lens is and how impossible it is to achieve shallow DOF with it.

Wedding shot with X100s, no DOF with that 23mm 2.0 He also did a blind test with people and more than half cannot tell the difference between the X100, 100s and 5diii if your comparing photo's.
Fuji X100S Wedding Photography - Colorado - Brian Kraft Photography

[Nicolas06]

You can't achieve shallow depth of field with a 23mm lens? Do you have proof of this or just regurgitating some misguided statements you have read on the internet?

Do a flickr seach of 23mm f1.4 and let me know how useless that lens is and how impossible it is to achieve shallow DOF with it.

On the examples given by LeeRunge, you have to shoot 1/4 of a head to get less shallow deph of field that you get comfortably from an FA77 or 50-135 on the same kind of shoots. I can see what my FA77 does wide open and it is not at all the same in practive.

Well except if you accept to be real near your subject that is. I understand that for the same framing you will get same dof, but that mean that if your are 2m away with a 77, you'll need to be 60cm away. That also mean the background will be less blurred because we speak only of dof not the amout of bokeh you' get.

For me, 23mm on APSC is not really for headshots where you'll have perspective distorsion and be too near to your subject. 23mm is more for scenes, and the interrest in this case is to have a scene that is wide, some mid range object in focus and everything in front and behind out of focus. That's excatly why so many complain of FF vs APSC shallow deph of field, because for wide angle, APSC is not shallow enough to be practical. If I was into that I would really think to buy an used FF and a 35mm f/1.4 and surely not a 23mm on APSC.

But I mean, everybody can do what he want. Me I tend to use more 50mm f/1.4 & FA77 f/1.8 for my shallow deph of fields needs.

[philbaum]

Yes, but in the meantime Fuji X mount has no access to Sigma or Samyang primes in the way K mount has.
There is no >240mm tele.
No assess to legacy lenses without adaptor.
Poor battery performance.
You are stuck with your in-body Jpegs if you want something correct, and RAW filess are awfull or soft-limited to rework...
And don't speak about ergonomy, ruggedness of bodies, and lens flare...
There's an incredible hype for the Fuji X system, which besides high prices, is not convincing many re. compactness as a system.

If Fuji would shift to a Bayer system, i think they would be farther ahead. I'm totally invested in money and knowledge in Adobe LR and PS. Yet when reading the occasional thread about Fuji RAW conversion on dpreview, one poster says Adobe is "good enough", while another who's tested his theories, says there are 2 conversion programs that do a better job of sharpening/conversion than Adobe. And of course, DXO doesn't want to test the system because of its unusal X-trans filtered sensors.. I don't want to buy and learn special software for one camera. And don't recommend in camera jpegs to me

There, of course, are no perfect systems out there.

[D1N0]

If Fuji would shift to a Bayer system, i think they would be farther ahead. I'm totally invested in money and knowledge in Adobe LR and PS. Yet when reading the occasional thread about Fuji RAW conversion on dpreview, one poster says Adobe is "good enough", while another who's tested his theories, says there are 2 conversion programs that do a better job of sharpening/conversion than Adobe. And of course, DXO doesn't want to test the system because of its unusal X-trans filtered sensors.. I don't want to buy and learn special software for one camera. And don't recommend in camera jpegs to me

There, of course, are no perfect systems out there.

The XA-1 has a Bayer sensor.

[luftfluss]

Yes, but in the meantime Fuji X mount has no access to Sigma or Samyang primes in the way K mount has.
There is no >240mm tele.
No assess to legacy lenses without adaptor.
Poor battery performance.
You are stuck with your in-body Jpegs if you want something correct, and RAW filess are awfull or soft-limited to rework...
And don't speak about ergonomy, ruggedness of bodies, and lens flare...
There's an incredible hype for the Fuji X system, which besides high prices, is not convincing many re. compactness as a system.

- Fuji's announced a 140-400 lens.

- Silkypix and Adobe LR both work pretty well with the Fuji RAW files. Fuji has *great* JPGs.

- I spot-checked 2 Fuji lenses on Lenstip, and they both handled flare pretty well.

- Where are the new Zeiss lenses for Pentax? Oh, there aren't any. Unlike Fuji...

[D1N0]

- Fuji's announced a 140-400 lens.

- Silkypix and Adobe LR both work pretty well with the Fuji RAW files. Fuji has *great* JPGs.

- I spot-checked 2 Fuji lenses on Lenstip, and they both handled flare pretty well.

- Where are the new Zeiss lenses for Pentax? Oh, there aren't any. Unlike Fuji...

Canon is even better you know. Lots of lenses, lots of third Party, Full frame, great software support. Don't bother with Fuji or Pentax, because with Canon you can.

[jpzk]

Yes, but in the meantime Fuji X mount has no access to Sigma or Samyang primes in the way K mount has.
There is no >240mm tele.
No assess to legacy lenses without adaptor.
Poor battery performance.
You are stuck with your in-body Jpegs if you want something correct, and RAW filess are awfull or soft-limited to rework...
And don't speak about ergonomy, ruggedness of bodies, and lens flare...
There's an incredible hype for the Fuji X system, which besides high prices, is not convincing many re. compactness as a system.

Out of curiosity Zygonyx ...Do you own or have used any Fuji-X camera(s) ?

[luftfluss]

Canon is even better you know. Lots of lenses, lots of third Party, Full frame, great software support. Don't bother with Fuji or Pentax, because with Canon you can.

I'm not promoting any system - I'm not saying any system is better. But there's not really much of a reason to disparage other systems, especially when the rationale is inaccurate.

For my personal use, Pentax is the best system available.