[kenyee]

We will soon see many new lenses that will make almost every shooter happy.

Sooo....if I really want a DA85/1.4, will I be happy soon? How about a DA70-200/2.8?

[heatherslightbox]

I got my September issue of PopPhoto today and as a part of an article titled "The great new step-up lens", I found this bit, which I found very encouraging as a Pentaxian:

Finally, imaged-stabilized lenses are becoming more refined and less expensive. Canon and Nikon, which use lens-based stabilization, have been forced to keep a lid on pricing to compete with camera systems that have sensor-based, in-camera IS.

To me, it appears that Pentax, Sony, and Olympus are putting some pressure on the big 2 in terms of competition. For someone looking for a DSLR, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that with in-camera IS, every lens is stabilized and that in most cases, it definitely is a better value than buying the overpriced IS lenses. Knowing this, it opens up a lot more lens choices, which are all stabilized.

Long live in-camera SR!
Heather

[Lance B]

Lance, don't get it personal. You didn't do that years ago at DPR and I did respect you. But why you have changed now? :-(

But since I treat you as one of my old friends, I beg you to think about WHY I want to see Pentax failed. Why? (You do not need to answer me, just think yourself to see if there is any reason(s) for me to do so.)

Your history of negative posts will answer that question.

Whether you believe it or not, you see me so negative just because there are many important things of the present Pentax bodies and system are just performing so "negative". To name a few, inaccurate and inconsistent metering, slow(er) AF, insensitive AF and hunting at indoor, non-intelligent predictive AF with lower hit rate, lower FPS, tungsten AF front focusing, hot sensor and so on. There is still no compact and lightweight entry level DSLR, too. Well, the newest digital lenses do not reproduce the good old taste and colors as the old traditional Pentax glass, too (not too old, just those FA lenses designed in the 90s, say)

If there are some real improvements in their bodies and lineup, I would be glad and happiest forever to report that in my blog and changed that into a Pentax "praising" blog. But not until Pentax/Hoya will have a real determination to do so and take actions to make things real, I bet you will continue to hate me just like what you and some others do to me now.

Having a blog about suspect testing procedures which are *designed* to show failure of *any* DSLR camera regardless opf brand is not what I call *wanting* to see Pentax survive. I *want* to see Pentax survive too, but do you see me having a blog wtih such testing? Do you see anyone else doing the same? Do you see everyone else having the so-called difficulties that *you* seem to have with their Pentax gear? If *I* or anyone else wanted to see a company survive, I can sure as hell not set up a blog denegrating, lambasting and finding fault with things that are not at fault and even if they were at fault I wouldn't take this approach.

*If* I did find fault with their cameras, I would contact the powers to be at Pentax and advise them of these anomolies and give them my testing procedures and results.

Unfortunately, your testing *and* your intent is being called into question due to this fixation and desire that you believe that everything Pentax is faulty and that only *you* are correct.

On the other hand, I do hate the slow and little progress for Pentax to improve their system nor I can see Hoya now plan to invest more to make the system stronger and to make Pentax products more competitive (by debugging and upgrading the longly persistent weaknesses/bugs and to introduce new *innovations* which others DSLR makers haven't made yet).

Furthermore, the most annoying thing is that the latest Pentax star primes are also asking for ridiculous high prices by Hoya since these were marketed. Take the DA*300/4 for example, it is now selling at HK$13,000 whereas the Canon EF 300/4 L is just at HK$9600 *whilst* a FA*300/4.5 sold at 2003 was only HK$5400. With such a new pricing strategy set by Hoya, which is indeed very wrong and it is nothing different than commit suicide. Even Canonians hate some ridiculous high price tags of some very fast or super tele L lenses but now that the Pentax glass are priced even more ridiculously and they are far more difficult to find. Well, we shouldn't forget Pentax is NOT Canon. Canon does always have pro or up-market bodies to support sales of those high-priced lenses and a solid user base as well, Pentax does NOT. The only way they could survive is to reasonable price their lenses with good to outstanding optical performance, just like they did before. Only that there is a reason to go Pentax, otherwise, there is none, even the DA* are priced near the L. Do note in Canon land, there is also cheaper L and expensive L, so the users have at least 3 levels of lenses (class) to choose from, for the same focal or focal range.

The FA*300 f4.5 is no longer sold and it was expensive because it was hand built on antiquated production lines.

The DA*300 f4 is now produced on a treamlined production line with up to date technologies *and* it's cost is similar to the Canon 300 f4 L with arguable better image quality. And before you go off about FF, the DA*300 *is* FF compatible.

The price at B&H photo is US$1174 for the DA*300 f4 and the Canon 300 f4 L is US$1189 to US$1210 depending on which model. The Pentax seems to be very competitive to me.

So, afterall, you mean a single Ned's personal email to you is more official, important and true than the quarterly financial report published by Hoya to their shareholders?

The financial report only shows that they made a *small* loss and the was *due* to the purchase cost of Pentax.

Ned's email to me shows that Hoya is going to make the Pentax acquisiton *work* which can't be shown in a financial styatement. A desire for success by it's management is just as important, if not more so, as a financial statement especially when the might of Hoya and Samsung is behind you.

[RiceHigh]

Your history of negative posts will answer that question.

So, you need to do to me in a personal way whenever I post at forums and whatever I reply to others?

Having a blog about suspect testing procedures which are *designed* to show failure of *any* DSLR camera regardless opf brand is not what I call *wanting* to see Pentax survive. I *want* to see Pentax survive too, but do you see me having a blog wtih such testing? Do you see anyone else doing the same? Do you see everyone else having the so-called difficulties that *you* seem to have with their Pentax gear? If *I* or anyone else wanted to see a company survive, I can sure as hell not set up a blog denegrating, lambasting and finding fault with things that are not at fault and even if they were at fault I wouldn't take this approach.

What "degeneration"? If there are those reports floating around the net, what's wrong to report and summarise them? The reports are not "created" by me nor the tests / reviews results are "tested" by me, mostly.

If you don't believe or agree, that's fine. But you can't bash me neither. Can you stop users to report the "negatives" and stop reviewers to reports those you look "unfavourable" and actually hate to see?

*If* I did find fault with their cameras, I would contact the powers to be at Pentax and advise them of these anomolies and give them my testing procedures and results.

Unfortunately, your testing *and* your intent is being called into question due to this fixation and desire that you believe that everything Pentax is faulty and that only *you* are correct.

I have not carried out any more formal tests on Pentax gear for a long time, as I know they are just like that, as many other users report the same. So, whats the use of contact the Pentax service (for design inadequacies)?

The FA*300 f4.5 is no longer sold and it was expensive because it was hand built on antiquated production lines.

The DA*300 f4 is now produced on a treamlined production line with up to date technologies *and* it's cost is similar to the Canon 300 f4 L with arguable better image quality. And before you go off about FF, the DA*300 *is* FF compatible.

The price at B&H photo is US$1174 for the DA*300 f4 and the Canon 300 f4 L is US$1189 to US$1210 depending on which model. The Pentax seems to be very competitive to me.

The cost of a Canon 300 L compared to a Canon 1 bodies is not huge. The cost of a DA 300 compared to the even "highest grade" K20D is huge! Of course, there are still people would buy but the market is small. Pentax is not Canon, unless they have pro grade bodies, they can't take this "Canon" strategy for selling better lenses at ridiculous high costs.

The financial report only shows that they made a *small* loss and the was *due* to the purchase cost of Pentax.

Pentax's endoscopic products earn much as told. If Pentax's overall has a loss, even if it is small, what does this mean?

It just means the other business, i.e., camera business, lost much, so that all the hard earned money by the endoscope division yet get lost in the camera division.

Ned's email to me shows that Hoya is going to make the Pentax acquisiton *work* which can't be shown in a financial styatement. A desire for success by it's management is just as important, if not more so, as a financial statement especially when the might of Hoya and Samsung is behind you.

His statements tell us nothing indeed. Its just any marketing representative will tell us from time to time in any situation and for anything.

[Lance B]

So, you need to do to me in a personal way whenever I post at forums and whatever I reply to others?

I reply where I see fit. In your case, I see fit.

What "degeneration"? If there are those reports floating around the net, what's wrong to report and summarise them? The reports are not "created" by me nor the tests / reviews results are "tested" by me, mostly.

I believe your reports/tests are flawed and over critical.

If you don't believe or agree, that's fine. But you can't bash me neither.

Bash you? Where did I bash you? I question your motives and testing.

Can you stop users to report the "negatives" and stop reviewers to reports those you look "unfavourable" and actually hate to see?

Not at all, but I have the right to refute your findings and question your judgement, as much as you have the right to question mine, especially when the majority are happy with their cameras and report *no* such issues like you report.

I have not carried out any more formal tests on Pentax gear for a long time, as I know they are just like that, as many other users report the same. So, whats the use of contact the Pentax service (for design inadequacies)?

How does "not carrying out tests for a long time" somehow now make everything ok and you are no longer the basher of Pentax?

A *few* users with issues does not a bad camera make.

The cost of a Canon 300 L compared to a Canon 1 bodies is not huge. The cost of a DA 300 compared to the even "highest grade" K20D is huge! Of course, there are still people would buy but the market is small. Pentax is not Canon, unless they have pro grade bodies, they can't take this "Canon" strategy for selling better lenses at ridiculous high costs.

This is the most ridiculous argument you have made yet! You are saying that because the DA*300 is more expensive when *compared* to the cost of a K20D than a Canon 300 f4 L lens compared to a 1DS MKII cost, then this is the wrong pricing strategy for Pentax? How crazy an idea is that?

Pentax made a 300mm lens with top quality performance to suit the extremely high resolution of the K20D sensor *and* so that it may possibly be used on any future FF camera. It has nothing to do with how they set the price for the DA*300 but how much it costs them to produce a lens of this quality to *match* the quality *requirement* of the K20D.

Pentax's endoscopic products earn much as told. If Pentax's overall has a loss, even if it is small, what does this mean?

Nothing, that's what it means.

It just means the other business, i.e., camera business, lost much, so that all the hard earned money by the endoscope division yet get lost in the camera division.

It had nothing to do with it.

His statements tell us nothing indeed. Its just any marketing representative will tell us from time to time in any situation and for anything.

So why is Pentax any different from any other company that has been purchased? Ned's statement is *MUCH, MUCH, MUCH* more valid than yours as he is *involved* with Pentax and Hoya and *knows* what Hoya is doing as he is *VERY* close to the Hoya executives who make the decisions. *You* have *no* idea and are purely *speculating* after seeing a small loss in their financial report after one year when the cost of acquisition is added in, yet somehow *you* think you know mre than Ned. What a joke. You cannot expect Pentax's profit to be positive after one year when the cost of the acquisition of Pentax is factored into the equation. If you think *any* company will be in profit in that time frame, then you are dillusional.

[zntgrg]

The cost of a Canon 300 L compared to a Canon 1 bodies is not huge. The cost of a DA 300 compared to the even "highest grade" K20D is huge! Of course, there are still people would buy but the market is small. Pentax is not Canon, unless they have pro grade bodies, they can't take this "Canon" strategy for selling better lenses at ridiculous high costs.

Have you ever seen price tags of 4/3 lenses? if you have, maybe you can't remember because of the shock

Btw, you are right here, but you should also notice the steady pace of new lens announcements. Aside from the ill fated 60-250, Pentax is the most active manufacturer from this point of view.

You should notice that Hoya maybe can look absent, but gives to Pentax a lot of freedom...think about Minolta...here we have the brand still alive and total [maybe too much, you say?] independence.
If Hoya management is really the evil empire you speak of, and/or Pentax heads are really the dumbass you think they are, these won't ever happened.

At least two HUGE corporates believe in Pentax camera division, and care to leave them working with their heads. They can change their minds, but for Samsung-Pentax joint venture is the 2nd Photokina, and the wedding seems happier than ever.


Your critics are often right, but you should also thanks Pentax if they makes good steps. Seeing the glass always empty is only mirrored fanboyism.

[Parallax]

RiceHigh, I think I've found a solution to your problem: LINK

[straightshooter]

RiceHigh, I think I've found a solution to your problem: LINK

ROFLMHO Now that is funny!!!!!! Why are the rest of you playing Don Quixote tilting at windmills. It does nothing but waste your time and energy plus get you annoyed. And it doesn't bother the windmill at all.

CW

So, you need to do to me in a personal way whenever I post at forums and whatever I reply to others?



What "degeneration"? If there are those reports floating around the net, what's wrong to report and summarise them? The reports are not "created" by me nor the tests / reviews results are "tested" by me, mostly.

If you don't believe or agree, that's fine. But you can't bash me neither. Can you stop users to report the "negatives" and stop reviewers to reports those you look "unfavourable" and actually hate to see?

So, let's sumarise a bit: by your own admision you're nothing but a compiler of "true" or "imaginate" bad things about Pentax gear. And the very fact that you wrote "negatives" gave you away as an biased person. Why not compile the "positives" if this is all you do ... compile?! The answer it's simple: you're a biased fanatic and that makes you a very unreliable source.

I have not carried out any more formal tests on Pentax gear for a long time, as I know they are just like that, as many other users report the same. So, whats the use of contact the Pentax service (for design inadequacies)?

Ok, so basically what you're saying is that you have no modern Pentax gear and no intention to buy more, esentially since you're a Canon user and fanboy. So, let me be at least concern about your impartiality towards Pentax!

The cost of a Canon 300 L compared to a Canon 1 bodies is not huge. The cost of a DA 300 compared to the even "highest grade" K20D is huge! Of course, there are still people would buy but the market is small. Pentax is not Canon, unless they have pro grade bodies, they can't take this "Canon" strategy for selling better lenses at ridiculous high costs.

Here we have another sample of your [snip] lack of logic. May I ask why you compare K20D with the "1" series from Canon and not with 40D? I doubt you have an answer for that! Let's forget a moment this and move on to your next "assertion". DA*300 costs pretty much the same as K20D body (current prices) and it was cheaper than K20D only 2 months ago. Of course Pentax is not Canon because Pentax will preserve its market share or increase it and Canon will lose another 5-7 points by the end of 2008!

Pentax's endoscopic products earn much as told. If Pentax's overall has a loss, even if it is small, what does this mean?

Nothing except the fact that they lost 360K USD in a quarter in camera business (p&s, DSLR bodies and lenses) and earned 200M USD in rest of their activities including endoscopic and other medical products of course in adition to other Hoya products and services. A minor loss is nothing to be worried about especially since we don't know the expenses (I hope more money for marketing, R&D, etc)

It just means the other business, i.e., camera business, lost much, so that all the hard earned money by the endoscope division yet get lost in the camera division.

Rice, you have no qualification in this business field so pls don't embarass you any further. Pentax is only a brand name in Hoya Corp. it doesn't retain it's former organisation so if camera business loses a sum it means exactly that and (I guess you don't notice any good news) if Hoya makes 200M USD profit as a group it is in part because other ex-Pentax divisions!

His statements tell us nothing indeed. Its just any marketing representative will tell us from time to time in any situation and for anything.

And your statements tell us indeed that you are an insider, or what? So, the head of Pentax USA has no clue and you know it all.

BTW: Pentax 300 mm 4.0 DA SDM - Foto Erhardt - Pentax DA* 300 - 929 Euro;
Canon 300 mm EF 4.0 USM - Foto Erhardt - Canon - 1199 Euro.
RH, the world doesn't end in your backyard, there are many markets with VERYFIABLE prices not the bs you feed to this forum!

Glad to embarass you again,
Radu

[codiac2600]

Wow RH ignored my post because he couldn't find anything wrong in it to ague about.

Oh well, guess he is finally feeling the pressure of people who know more about this stuff than he does.

Wow RH ignored my post because he couldn't find anything wrong in it to ague about.

Oh well, guess he is finally feeling the pressure of people who know more about this stuff than he does.

Chris,

Last week or so RH was talking about "how expensive the DA* 200 is" compared to some Canon old lens he likes so much now it's DA* 300 and so on. I honnestly think it's not bright enough to work for Canon even as a FUD mouth piece. I tend to agree with the theory that he has something personal against Pentax. I feel sorry for him at a personal level but I'll rebuke with joy any of his further lies.
On a different note in a couple of months Pentax will become (at least) a 3 camera system and we'll be busy analysing the new cams, lenses and lens roadmaps.

Best regards,
Radu

[Peacekeeper]

On a very basic level your logic is flawed.

You said in reply to Lance’s post “…I beg you to think about WHY I want to see Pentax failed….”

Finally an admission to your own bias!!!!!

So, you admit that you want Pentax to Fail and therefore logically your website is aimed at fulfilling that goal. It would be illogical to create a website to support Pentax when you want it to fail.

If your intent is to point out the flaws in Pentax (as you see them) to potential DLSR camera buyers and use every opportunity to link to your website so as to maximise the exposure of your views, and knowing the mob mentality that exists on the net, combined with the level at which new photographers use the net to garnish advice about what system to enter into, then you are achieving your goal of turning new Pentax users away.

The more people you scare away with your views the more damage you are doing to potential sales of Pentax.

So if your goal is NOT to see Pentax fail then try supporting the company with less BIASED views on their cameras/Lenses/ advertising methodology/pricing and anything else that Pentax does.

However, if you goal is to attempt to make Pentax fail, then be prepared to get a lot more negative comments every time you post now we know what your aim is.


PK

[Aristophanes]

I have an inside source at Pentax. The told me that they are working and a limited production special release DSLR that only a very select few will get. It is called the k20d "RH" edition. What it does is that when the shutter release is pressed, the user gets a 20,000 volt zap in the underpants. It should work great for portraits because the photographer will no longer have to "say cheese."

Of course, this presumes one takes photos with the camera in one's underpants.

[Blue]

Of course, this presumes one takes photos with the camera in one's underpants.

It is designated as the RH special edition mode for a reason.

[Blue]

On a very basic level your logic is flawed.

You said in reply to Lance’s post “…I beg you to think about WHY I want to see Pentax failed….”

Finally an admission to your own bias!!!!!

So, you admit that you want Pentax to Fail and therefore logically your website is aimed at fulfilling that goal. It would be illogical to create a website to support Pentax when you want it to fail.

If your intent is to point out the flaws in Pentax (as you see them) to potential DLSR camera buyers and use every opportunity to link to your website so as to maximise the exposure of your views, and knowing the mob mentality that exists on the net, combined with the level at which new photographers use the net to garnish advice about what system to enter into, then you are achieving your goal of turning new Pentax users away.

The more people you scare away with your views the more damage you are doing to potential sales of Pentax.

So if your goal is NOT to see Pentax fail then try supporting the company with less BIASED views on their cameras/Lenses/ advertising methodology/pricing and anything else that Pentax does.

However, if you goal is to attempt to make Pentax fail, then be prepared to get a lot more negative comments every time you post now we know what your aim is.


PK

Exactly! ding ding ding