Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-03-2014, 11:28 AM   #406
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,487
QuoteOriginally posted by fast50 Quote
And with the Pentax, you have an optical viewfinder, so f/3.2 gives you a darker image, whereas on the Fuji's EVF would compensate for the slower lens. People always overlook the benefits of a bright viewfinder and assume everyone just wants a fast lens to get narrow depth of field.
Plenty of people here prefer to see what is actually in front of the lens - and avoid the EVF headache. Fuji isn't there yet.

Again, why are you here arguing with Pentax users about whether Fuji is better? For me - no, it isn't. I don't like the form factor, I don't buy the idea that a regular lens on a skinny, shiny, hipster plate is better than a slim lens on a traditional body and I certainly don't want to watch television inside my viewfinder. I believe my eyes, not Fuji lies.

I don't want it. But don't worry. Soon I'll be dead and you'll still be arguing with Pentax users.

10-03-2014, 11:45 AM   #407
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,107
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
My 21 and 40XS come almost every where. My FA 50 and DA 35 go almost no where
I just got the 21 this year. It's been my most used lens this year, with my 40Ltd coming in second and the 15Ltd not far behind that. The only time I've even mounted my 31Ltd is do do the focus adjustment when I got my K-5iis. I've become addicted to the pancakes.
10-03-2014, 11:51 AM - 2 Likes   #408
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,955
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Plenty of people here prefer to see what is actually in front of the lens - and avoid the EVF headache. Fuji isn't there yet.

Again, why are you here arguing with Pentax users about whether Fuji is better? For me - no, it isn't. I don't like the form factor, I don't buy the idea that a regular lens on a skinny, shiny, hipster plate is better than a slim lens on a traditional body and I certainly don't want to watch television inside my viewfinder. I believe my eyes, not Fuji lies.

I don't want it. But don't worry. Soon I'll be dead and you'll still be arguing with Pentax users.
You sound discouraged. Honestly, I don't see Fuji as having a particularly smaller body as compared to cameras like the K5 or K3. It's just thinner. Certainly not more portable. And the lenses are about the same size.

On the other hand, it is nice to have options. If you want fast lenses, there are FA limiteds and Sigma primes and if you are OK with slower lenses (and you want smaller lenses) there are DA limiteds. The DA limiteds are the sort of lenses that folks that don't shoot Pentax don't understand. The look terrible on the whole "equivalence" thing, but they are just so much fun to shoot, it doesn't really matter...

10-03-2014, 11:58 AM   #409
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,769
I was so inspired by this Fuji thing I looked at my favourite fabric samples on Imaging Resource, my K-3 is better, I looked at the cost of my favourite lens, the 18-135, it's $1000 for the Fuji, it can be had on a Pentax for about $500, and the IQ on a K-3 is going to be better than the IQ of the fuji version on an X-pro 1(16) MP even if the lens is better. And the Pentax is 90 grams lighter. End of investigation...

Weightr- XTi 390 grams ... 18-135 490 grams... combo price $1999 longest lens available XF 50-150, $1699
--------------K3 800 grams.. 18-135 - 405 grams combo price $1399 longest comparable lens available DA* 60-250 $1399
--------------K-50 649 grams.. 18-135 405 grams combo price $699

If you want Xti or X pro 1 quality get a K-50 and save yourself a pile of money... just my advice. You can almost have the K-50 18-135 and DA*60-250.. for the cost of the xTi and 18-135..

OK, that's really the end of the investigation.

10-03-2014, 11:59 AM   #410
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,487
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
You sound discouraged.
Not really. Frustrated - sure.

I need to do more of this* ^^ and less of that <<.



* Must be nice to live in Indiana - beautiful state. I have to drive 2 hours before I can walk 30 minutes to get to that kind of location.

Last edited by monochrome; 10-03-2014 at 12:06 PM.
10-03-2014, 12:13 PM   #411
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,955
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Not really. Frustrated - sure.

I need to do more of this* ^^ and less of that <<.



* Must be nice to live in Indiana - beautiful state. I have to drive 2 hours before I can walk 30 minutes to get to that kind of location.
The Indiana border is only a couple of hours from St Louis, now that the speed limit is 70 mph on I-64.
10-03-2014, 01:25 PM   #412
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,707
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
I just got the 21 this year. It's been my most used lens this year, with my 40Ltd coming in second and the 15Ltd not far behind that. The only time I've even mounted my 31Ltd is do do the focus adjustment when I got my K-5iis. I've become addicted to the pancakes.
The DA21 is more than the sum of its specs.
10-03-2014, 01:53 PM   #413
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New York, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 75
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
However, currently only two companies really offer it, at least cleanly: Nikon and Canon.
Is there something about Sony's Full-Frame offering (which is rumored to be refreshed very soon) that doesn't provide a sufficiently "clean" upgrade path for their ASP-C A-Mount users?

-XM

10-03-2014, 02:01 PM   #414
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,509
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
And soon, imaging sensors will be everywhere, not just phones, tablets, notebooks and cameras. But cars, watches, glasses, frigerators, TVs, traffic lights, ... trillions. I already own a dozen or so (image sensors, not cameras).
How true! My son started counting the cameras in our family the other day. I don't remember the total, but it was amazing - every smart phone has two, the four iPads in the family each has two, our car has two, and so on...
10-03-2014, 02:26 PM   #415
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,415
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
But in no way it is investment.
Actually it is, and I have made money on lenses. The 31mm LTD is selling for more now on the used market than I paid for it new. I have used it all this time and can still sell it for a profit. I am selling my Contax 645 system. I bought all but one of my lenses after Contax was discontinued in 2005. Because I bought it so cheap, I can sell my entire system today for more than I paid for it almost 10 years ago. These hipsters are nuts about old film cameras and everyone in my market seems to want a Contax 645. I love the camera, but its time to move on and get my money back out of it. My MF film scanner died last year and I don't want to "invest" in another one. By this time next year I plan to be all digital.

These are tools that I use in my business. Any money I spend on equipment for my business I consider an investment.

You have every right to not look at lenses as an investment. Many of us do look at it that way whether you like it or not.
10-03-2014, 02:32 PM   #416
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,955
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Actually it is, and I have made money on lenses. The 31mm LTD is selling for more now on the used market than I paid for it new. I have used it all this time and can still sell it for a profit. I am selling my Contax 645 system. I bought all but one of my lenses after Contax was discontinued in 2005. Because I bought it so cheap, I can sell my entire system today for more than I paid for it almost 10 years ago. These hipsters are nuts about old film cameras and everyone in my market seems to want a Contax 645. I love the camera, but its time to move on and get my money back out of it. My MF film scanner died last year and I don't want to "invest" in another one. By this time next year I plan to be all digital.

These are tools that I use in my business. Any money I spend on equipment for my business I consider an investment.

You have every right to not look at lenses as an investment. Many of us do look at it that way whether you like it or not.
It still isn't an investment. You have tools that happen to hold their value or even gain a little value, but you don't buy 5 31 limiteds on the off chance that in five years you could sell them for a 10 percent increase over what you bought them for now. That would be an investment.

Buying a lens that you use is buying equipment. If it happens to appreciate in value, that's fine, but I still wouldn't call it an investment (as compared to stocks, bonds, CDs, etc).
10-03-2014, 02:33 PM   #417
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
I keep waiting for the next round of price increases! Come on, Pentax!
10-03-2014, 02:37 PM   #418
Pentaxian
LensBeginner's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,490
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The look terrible on the whole "equivalence" thing, but they are just so much fun to shoot, it doesn't really matter...

Mmmmh... that picture...
Color is so good it's mouth-watering.
Nice idea and composition!
10-03-2014, 02:42 PM   #419
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
It still isn't an investment. You have tools that happen to hold their value or even gain a little value, but you don't buy 5 31 limiteds on the off chance that in five years you could sell them for a 10 percent increase over what you bought them for now. That would be an investment.

Buying a lens that you use is buying equipment. If it happens to appreciate in value, that's fine, but I still wouldn't call it an investment (as compared to stocks, bonds, CDs, etc).
There are people who buy lenses to sell them. I did that myself for a small series of 645 lenses believing that the 645D would actually come. Did get a free K-5 Silver out of it. If the 645D didn't come, I probably still would have them having no value. Currently for K-mount it is difficult.
10-03-2014, 02:55 PM   #420
Marketplace Reseller
dcshooter's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Washington DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,116
I do that myself as well, but I only base it on present value. I.E. if I see a lens for sale at a below-market price, I'll buy it and resell it quickly or it is something I will play with until I can find a buyer. I'll also often acquire extra lenses that I'll later resell if they are included in a kit that has a particular piece of gear that I want.

Speculating on price increases for lenses of a particular mount doesn't make a ton of sense. Universal (m42, T2, etc.) and mounts adaptable with glassless adapters to Canon/Nikon (including K, Olympus OM) are going to stay relatively stable. Harder to adapt mounts like Minolta MD are worth less, although there is somewhat more interest as mirrorless has made them more feasible, but they are unlikely to appreciate much more than they already have. The value of Maxxum/Alpha mount lenses, on the other hand, has cratered now that it has been pretty much orphaned by Sony's decision to focus on the E mount. "Beercan" lenses that were worth up to $250 a couple of years ago are now often selling for less than $100.

QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
There are people who buy lenses to sell them. I did that myself for a small series of 645 lenses believing that the 645D would actually come. Did get a free K-5 Silver out of it. If the 645D didn't come, I probably still would have them having no value. Currently for K-mount it is difficult.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, development, dslr, engineers, ff, full-frame, gallery, hands-on, idea, information, lens, lenses, market, mirrorless, model, nikon, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photographyblog, photos, price, sensor, tc, tcs, telephoto, thread, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
One more time, but in a funny way: Crop Sensors vs Full Frame carlosodze Pentax Full Frame 32 10-16-2014 01:15 PM
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon Mr_Canuck Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 42 01-21-2014 12:50 AM
Full frame or no full frame.... Deedee Pentax K-3 14 10-08-2013 05:39 AM
Vivitar flash no fire, no smoke either! telfish Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 10 04-15-2011 08:48 PM
Need more megapix? Future possibilities and no need for full frame! rburgoss Pentax DSLR Discussion 57 10-16-2008 03:16 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:43 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top