Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-27-2016, 07:53 AM   #676
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: ct
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 146
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
So the K-1 is on B&H for $1796.95USD, and the Nikon D750 on B&H is $1996.95USD.

Then in Australia the Pentax K-1 has started out at $3188AUD, next to the Nikon D810 retail price of $3191AUD.

Then Pentax/Ricoh Australia dropped the price to $2899AUD, and the Nikon D750 retails for $2297AUD in Australia.

Can someone explain why a Pentax K-1 is cheaper than a Nikon D750 in the US, but in Australia the K-1 is $602 more expensive than a Nikon D750.

Please don't answer by implying that I'm poor and can't afford one, or there's the pre-order price versus the retail price yadda yadda yadda. Or the US market is the premier market with millions of people in it, the Euro zone is similar in size, and the Asian market might be too.

(Its not a trick question, what I think is the answer will be written below)

I actually had no interest in getting a K-1, and have been really happy with my K-3. When I saw the US price I was expecting something similar here in Australia, and I thought maybe I'll give it a go. But no, they jacked up the price into the clouds here in Australia.

Its funny how everyone was ticked off how Pentax never released a full frame camera etc etc. They were ticked off how they haven't got an upgrade path, and some of them were really outraged at that, and shook their fists at Pentax.

The full frame is here, and I might be one of the first to be shaking my fist at Pentax Australia. I mean really, I never thought I'd use this expression, but Pentax is really doomed here in Australia. At least Pentax USA has given customers a real good incentive to buy a K-1 over a D750, and Pentax might gain a real foot hold in the US. But in Australia, there's no chance ....... the cameras are gone from the shelves, and most camera stores can't even be bothered to stock Pentax.

The only piece of advertising I've seen from Pentax was an infotainment commercial for the Pentax K-50 a few weeks ago. I sat there and watched the whole half hour of it for fun. I was actually excited to see Pentax advertised on TV ! I'm guessing that CRK was over-stocked on K- 50's, (I think they sold 3 during the commercial). Normally Nikon does the infotainment on that channel.

The question again: Why is the K-1 $602AUD more expensive than a Nikon D750 in Australia, while in the US, the K-1 is cheaper than a Nikon D750 ?

(Answer = Rip-off)

Pentax is Doomed ! (now I'M one of those "Pentax is doomed" caption writers)
The last time I checked Australia it's just plain expensive. Taxes, Housing, food, electronics. Everything is more expensive over there. When the PS4 came out, wasn't it like $100 dollars more, over in Australia. The d750 is cheaper because is an older body, and its not selling as well as nikon wants it to. It's as simple as that.

Here is a report I read before about Australians paying more for IT products

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/life/personal-technology/australians-pay-50-...-1226687429151


Last edited by vimeto; 02-27-2016 at 08:05 AM.
02-27-2016, 08:02 AM   #677
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,496
QuoteOriginally posted by KDAFA Quote
+1, and not forgetting the FA43.

Truly, there is so, so much more to these three legends than merely "unusual focal lengths".

Moreover, test charts just can't tell the story here. Not easy to measure "soul".
We need a new metric. Line widths per picture height is good, but we need something more.
People used to argue about which peppers were hotter than which; but we now have Scoville Heat Units. A standardized quantifier.
We need something similar for lenses as an adjunct to LW/PH. We need a quantifiable, standardized Pixie Dust Unit.True lens performance could then be expressed as LW/PH x PDUs.
02-27-2016, 08:19 AM - 1 Like   #678
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,527
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
We need a quantifiable, standardized Pixie Dust Unit.True lens performance could then be expressed as LW/PH x PDUs.
That's kind of corny....but Otis liked it! Maybe test using "nut resolution" as a standard? That's kind of corny too......but Otis still liked it!


Regards!

Note to wandering Mods, bored and lookin' for some purpose in their duties.......

This is the last squirrel post to be made here, they have no interest in hijacking this thread, they are busy elsewhere at the moment anyhow. They realize this is a serious thread, like all K1 threads, and intend on showing the utmost respect and avoidance of squirrel humor.
02-27-2016, 08:50 AM   #679
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: So-central, MI / Central, IN
Posts: 172
When I was shopping for my first DSLR in 2012, my default position was for Nikon due to its known professional system features (e.g. flash system). But admittedly I was quite drawn to the K-5 for its Pentax tuned sensor IQ, ergonomic handling, and weather sealing.

In the end I decided to let the 'available lens selection' speak for the final decision. Go figure! - this is completely the OPPOSITE of how most others view the situation! 'Lens selection' to me meant which company offered lenses that more consistently stood out as having a unique rendering IQ. So I decided to see if 'results' could speak, and if they could I would let them make the final decision for me.

I then searched the web looking for image samples, and in particular samples which had identification of the lens associated with it. I saw lots of excellent images taken with technically near-perfect lenses (e.g. edge-to-edge sharpness) produced by the likes of Nikon and Canon. But after reviewing tons of images over a period of time I started to observe a subtle but reoccurring trend- a very few select lenses displayed a subtle yet unique enough rendering that a majority of their images when encountered could be reliably predicted regarding the particular lens used. Interestingly, all of these select few lenses ended up being produced by Pentax. The most consistent of which were the FA 77 ltd and DA* 55 ltd.

Needless to say- I ended up choosing Pentax over Nikon/Canon. And given Pentax's past history of producing some unique rendering glass, I find their system has to date offered a 'genuinely real' choice in lens selection and characteristics.

02-27-2016, 08:54 AM - 2 Likes   #680
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,496
QuoteOriginally posted by Rupert Quote
That's kind of corny....
Congratulations, Jim!
Corn cobs make a pretty good test targets, so after 10 years and nearly twenty thousand posts, you finally posted a picture that is remotely relevant to the thread.
02-27-2016, 09:01 AM   #681
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,527
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
so after 10 years and nearly twenty thousand posts, you finally posted a picture that is remotely relevant to the thread.
My apology, it must have been a freak accident in my head. I've been having some headaches lately, and have been thinking my brain may be growing. Mrs Rupert assures me that is nonsense, but I haven't lost my keys or glasses in weeks....so there may be a chance.....?

Regards!
02-27-2016, 09:05 AM   #682
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,088
Barney also likes the K-1:

02-27-2016, 09:06 AM   #683
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,049
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Test charts are a tool, to check if a sample match the specifications for example. But unfortunally there a business to make lenses reviews and to be paid by advertisement with a good share of photographic gear ads. Not only you can't really be 100% objective when your revenue depends of the manufacturer of the gear you evaluate, but this is small business.

This is not a serious review where say you'll have 20-30 photographers with various background test the thing for a few months with a few hundred sample shots from maybe 10 thousand taken. Several camera for lenses, many lenses for a camera... There no field report of every feature or shoting condition and for formal tests there almost only sharpness.

I mean, you need to make money and so to spend less than advertisement provide and for people to come back often, you need to have almost all gear available reviewed. Photozone for example look to be a one man show with the idea that the website give him salary. if he is making few thousands a months on average, he can't spend 50000$ on each review. He likely can't afford than to spend 1-2 day of work for each thing he test and he must industrialize like testing 2-3 lens on the same sessions/outing.

That's funny already how photozone or say ephotozine give few field shot and how the most difference there in the shot is not the gear but basically the weather.

When serious people want to buy gear, they try to figure what is best. What their choice is? Price comparator. Manufacturer propagnanda, forum where valuable information is hidden among troll posts and reviews websites.

Lenses like FAltd only get discovered by fanatics of the brand, then it is mostly by word of mouth that by spending lot of time discussing gear you'll understand that there truely something interresting there...

If you are a pro, time is money, and it may not be worth the time to spend days on forums and on the net to try to outrun say Canon L lenses.
So how is today any different from when a small number of print magazines did the reviews, and used lens dealers sent mimeographed 'catalogs' in the mail?

02-27-2016, 09:09 AM   #684
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,049
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
And a removed aperture ring...
In lens or screwdriver? What's the bound?
02-27-2016, 09:17 AM   #685
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,527
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
Barney also likes the K-1:
I was so disappointed. I was expecting the REAL Barney and you gave us some guy I've never heard of. For others as disappointed as me, let me correct your post......

https://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=vmn&type=vmn__webcompa__1_0__ya__ch_WCYID..._yaff&p=barney

Regards!
02-27-2016, 09:20 AM   #686
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,088
Amateur Photographer:
02-27-2016, 09:25 AM - 1 Like   #687
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 480
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
We need a new metric. Line widths per picture height is good, but we need something more.
People used to argue about which peppers were hotter than which; but we now have Scoville Heat Units. A standardized quantifier.
We need something similar for lenses as an adjunct to LW/PH. We need a quantifiable, standardized Pixie Dust Unit.True lens performance could then be expressed as LW/PH x PDUs.
Have no fear regarding the FA43's performance wide open.

In field tests of the FA43 conducted over a period of two decades, the lens at f2.8 returned a strong value of 75 units for "pixie dust magic", with the value steadily increasing as the aperture opened up, finally hitting well in excess of 100 units at f1.9 (wide open), ie. beyond the sensor's ability to resolve.

Lots more to a good lens than just sharpness.

Dunno, when wide open, I'm gunning for very shallow depth-of-field to isolate the main subject from its periphery. Never had any issues with central sharpness, whereas the issue of edge sharpness does not arise.

Indeed in this context, the main issue, aesthetically speaking, isn't sharpness per se. The 43 wide open will give you sufficient subject sharpness alright. But here we're talkin' major rendering and "mood"; "pixie magic" time.

Last edited by KDAFA; 02-27-2016 at 10:20 AM.
02-27-2016, 09:29 AM   #688
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,621
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
So how is today any different from when a small number of print magazines did the reviews, and used lens dealers sent mimeographed 'catalogs' in the mail?
You don't need to go back to the 3 year old review on that magazine for that lens and compare it with another review from another issue, maybe not even same magazine brand, having to buy all issues for a few years as to get an overview of how most common gear perform.

There was no imatest, no way to download the high resolution sample image and there was no way to see any difference on a 4x6" or 5x8" picture anyway. Ultimately, it was known that if you wanted sharpness, medium/large format was the way to go as film was the limiting factor anyway. i don't speak of the very high resolution figure film manage with 2-3% contrast, but more MTF50.
02-27-2016, 09:57 AM   #689
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,088
QuoteOriginally posted by Rupert Quote
I was so disappointed. I was expecting the REAL Barney and you gave us some guy I've never heard of. For others as disappointed as me, let me correct your post......

https://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=vmn&type=vmn__webcompa__1_0__ya__ch_WCYID..._yaff&p=barney

Regards!
Maybe because you were banned from dpreview years ago for doing squirrelly stuff?? He didn't used to have a beard

By the way I am not familiar with your Barney. This Barney however would be my real Barney.
02-27-2016, 03:59 PM - 2 Likes   #690
Veteran Member
robjmitchell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 1,144
QuoteOriginally posted by Zygonyx Quote
For sure, with HD coating
Who the hell wants HD coating on the DFA limiteds?
There is a hybrid coating of HD on SMC known as AEROBRIGHT II and its even better!
Only the best coating is worthy for FA limited update.
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!
auto, base, camera, company, compression, d810, design, dr, electrons, fa, hardware, iso, k-1, k-3, lenses, pentax, pentax body, pentax k-1, pentax news, pentax rumors, photos, pre-order, risk, sensor, specifications, timelapse, trip, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-3 II Officially Announced Adam Pentax News and Rumors 1015 07-03-2015 10:55 PM
Pentax K-S2 Officially Announced Adam Pentax K-S1 & K-S2 12 05-23-2015 06:49 AM
Pentax K-30 Officially Announced! Adam Pentax News and Rumors 245 09-12-2012 08:32 PM
Pentax K-5 Officially Announced Adam Pentax News and Rumors 533 03-06-2012 05:45 AM
K-5 Firmware 1.02 Officially Announced Ole Pentax K-5 50 01-20-2011 10:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:53 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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