[biz-engineer]

Ever heard of the term "social media Influencers" that's what some of the so called Pros are

Those are the ones who get free cameras and lenses to promote their via online video logs, workshop, they aren't the pro live off making photographs. The pros who are living off making photographs are largely unknown to the public, they work for press and communication agencies who may eventually also print billboard sized poster, and 48" wide poster glued over urban areas. Basically, the commercial folks are the ones buying $20000 printers and cameras. We should not confuse people who claim to be pro for advertising camera gear but who do not actually generate income from taking photographs, and pros who are largely unknow to the public because they are full time employed in the image creation process.

---------- Post added 20-05-19 at 08:02 ----------

Gear is an expense. Professionals wear out their gear before replacing it unless there is a real technology advantage - better images, faster, with less Post for instance because the gear changed. Those new advantages are less frequent now than in the first ten years of the digital conversion.

Exactly, I've seen a number of professionals (in the field) they aren't advertising gear anywhere, they change money for the photography services they deliver, and they use their wear their gear because it's a tool for them nothing else. I've seen pro shooting for national magazine and TV, the guy was using an 10 years old Canon 300 f2.8 you could barely see the original paint on the lens.

[interested_observer]

Late to the party.... A number of things come to mind in reading both the original interview along with these 6 pages of comments.

• I do believe that Pentax will sell more camera bodies where there is the need that they somewhat uniquely fill. For instance, Pixel Shift - however, you do need to efficiently illustrate the advantage. There is this one website that I believe provides the absolute best visual advantage of Pixel Shift, I have stumbled across --- Pentax K-1 Review - Pixel Shift in the Studio - Photography Classes in Seattle | National Park Photography Workshops | Photography Classes in Seattle | National Park Photography Workshops Just scroll down to the side by side swipe frames and swipe the bar from side to side to see the advantage.

• In addition to PF, I do scan the various Reddit photography areas. One area I do see folks moving into DSLRs/MLICs are folks with smartphones who want better images. I do think that the KP does compete here pretty well. I have watched a couple of comparisons of the KP with mirrorless in terms of physical size and it stacks up pretty well. The problem is that the vast majority of the recommendations are to Canon and Nikon. Folks just do not have an opportunity to find Pentax.

• Recently, I needed a new roll of gaffers tape, so off to the camera store I went, since I wanted to use it the next night. While there I was talking to a couple of the sales folks, and they were just lamenting that if only Pentax would advertise a bit, they could sell more Pentax cameras (but the new K5IIs they had on the shelf was $900, they also had a K1 and a 645Z with a couple of lenses). They also just happened to say that they were sponsoring a night photography class (read Milky Way) across 3 days for $99. The person teaching the class shoots for Arizona Highways and teaches their night photography classes (which runs $3K to $4k). $99 was an absolute bargain. They sponsor the class to sell more cameras. Yes, I did sign up.

• During the night photography class, the instructor came by to check how I was coming along - I had forgotten how to bring up the histogram, so I had my laptop out looking it up. So, we were talking, and she asked about the astrotracing capability. I pulled up my windmill shot (of which the location was a mile directly behind us). She was VERY interested, especially with the cost (compared to her Sony a7rIII, a9, etc.) - and not having to align with Polaris.

• Later that evening, a young gentleman arrived waaaaay late (~10pm) - he had just gotten off of work, had missed the prior night's class, and was also going to miss the next afternoon's post processing class, all due to work. He had just picked up a new K70 a couple of weeks before (2 kit lenses) and found a 28mm/f2.8 on craigslist for his astro lens. So, there was actually another Pentaxialian there too. I dove into my camera bag and pulled out the O-GPS1 and my Sigma 18-35/f1.8 lens (that I use on my K5IIs). We also found him a better spot to shoot from with tremendously better foreground to use. Calibrated up the K70, stuck on the pre-focused lens (gaffers tape) and he started shooting. He just sent me one of his shots that he processed on his smart phone with lightroom (picking up a laptop now to post process on). I was really amazed, very impressed with what the K70 captured. The Accelerator chip pretty much equaled the results from my K1 and 15-30. OK, to be fair, there was some high clouds we were shooting through, and I use LR 5.6 (no dehaze capability) and he was using LR Cloud with the dehaze capability which really did help to cut through the thin cloud layer. However, I shot the same area with perfect viability 3 weeks prior and had absolutely wonderful results. The K1 held its own extremely well against a lot of D850's, 5dm4's, a7rIII's, etc. Also, the K70 would have easily held its own too, while blowing away all the entry level Canon and Nikons.

• I do wish that Pentax would put just a tad more effort into their "marketing". Last year with the K1 / K1mkII - they could have put out some additional technical information on just how the Accelerator chip performed, as in results. The DR comparison showing the Accelerator chip kicking in at ISO 800 would have helped me decide. Some real low light, and especially some Milky Way shots would have really sealed the deal (especially with all the star eater discussion). They can pretty easily produce a page or two of images and some explanations with out giving up any of their secret sauce - and it would not really cost that much. Knowing back then what I know now - yes, I would have upgraded. Am I sorry I didn't - well, I am still happy with my decision - but I hate leaving 1.5 stops of DR on the ground.

• Back to the young gentleman. He actually had to do his own research to find Pentax. Yes, the camera store who offered the class, tried to sell him Canon. Another small local camera shop, listened to his wants - and recommended Pentax. It was everything he wanted. Yes, Pentax not competing on the very low price kits - looses out there, but in terms of the mid tier equals and exceeds them all. Yes, loosing access to the new Sigma lenses is a minus. Fewer accessories - L brackets, etc. is somewhat annoying. But, the additional capabilities, features and the image quality you get - balances things out.

• We went out night shooting the other evening. I really do have to hand it to the K70, its image quality is excellent (especially with quality glass). Some of the new features (Bulb shooting up to 5 minutes timed internally) is something I've wanted (on my K5IIs) for a long time, along with the articulating screen.

[Rondec]

I can’t authoritatively affirm that >90% of actual camera sales go to hobbyists, enthusiasts, and upper-middle class consumers who think they need a "real camera" but my daughter was a member of The American Society of Media Photographers when she worked for a Network Broadcast News company and remains a member of the Screenwriters Guild - East (her Union). She has said over and over about my compulsive gear buying that real professional photographers are conservative with their gear purchases/leases, using the minimum possible to get the best images possible, which makes sense. Pros (or the companies that employ them and often own the gear) are interested in making more money than they spend, Gear is an expense. Professionals wear out their gear before replacing it unless there is a real technology advantage - better images, faster, with less Post for instance because the gear changed. Those new advantages are less frequent now than in the first ten years of the digital conversion.

She once tried assigning Remotes with 5D’s instead of Sony professional shoulder cams, but it didn’t work. The video togs never learned to pull focus with a DSLR. Now she is the Communications and Media Director for a State Executive Branch Office (her employer is The Office of the [ . . . . . ]. Among her many responsibilities is directing the social media for the State Office.

Last week she ordered an iPhone shoot with a Gimbal to post to Instagram.

Telling?

Very much so. When you are getting 1500 dollars for a wedding and 200 dollars for a portrait shoot, you aren't going to run out to get the newest Sony mirrorless every time they advertise an extra 5 fps boost in the frame rate. Most wedding photographers I see are using older gear -- D810/5D MK II -- along with lenses that have clearly been in use for awhile. Because the gear they have works. The point is to satisfy their clients and as long as they can do that, there is no point in upgrading.

I have made this point many times, but there just really haven't been bad cameras turned out in the last five years. Even the terrible Canon sensors that aren't as good at low iso are still extremely capable in the field and do really well in higher iso situations. Unfortunately, that has meant that the market has dried up more than a little bit as neither pros nor hobby-ists feels the need to upgrade their cameras as often.

There is still a lot that Pentax can do and their slow release of new cameras means that each one will be heavily anticipated and will have to have real featured improvement (not like some of the past releases like K30 to K50 or K5 to K5 II).

[Mistral75]

And now Digital Photography Review's CP+ 2019 interview:

CP+ 2019 Ricoh interview: Some users who bought mirrorless cameras will return to DSLRs: Digital Photography Review

[normhead]

I’m OK with the low light performance of the K3, because the resolution suits me. The one thing that keeps my old favorite K3 out of my hands is the AF. The continuous AF in the K3 already couldn’t keep up with my old D7200, but the D500 AF is like Krell technology compared to a K3. Auto focus points swarm to moving birds. Please, Ricoh, bring SAFOX and SDM into this decade. The ergonomics on the K3 and K1 are a big advantage over Nikon and Sony, but the result still needs to be in focus

I don't use AF.c or tracking. Pentax AF.S single point focus confirm is twice as fast an the Nikon's, but I do have to be better getting the focus point on the bird. I don't find that difficult, and it means I tell it to focus on the eye, as opposed to where ever it is the camera thinks it should focus. I don't want Pentax to bother with the continuous AF thing if it means Nikon first frame acquisition speeds, which as far as i can tell puts Nikon, Canon and Sony shooters at a disadvantage in all but their top of the line models.

I'd look at your images to see what you have, but, I can't find any.

[GeneV]

Very much so. When you are getting 1500 dollars for a wedding and 200 dollars for a portrait shoot, you aren't going to run out to get the newest Sony mirrorless every time they advertise an extra 5 fps boost in the frame rate. Most wedding photographers I see are using older gear -- D810/5D MK II -- along with lenses that have clearly been in use for awhile. Because the gear they have works. The point is to satisfy their clients and as long as they can do that, there is no point in upgrading.

I have made this point many times, but there just really haven't been bad cameras turned out in the last five years. Even the terrible Canon sensors that aren't as good at low iso are still extremely capable in the field and do really well in higher iso situations. Unfortunately, that has meant that the market has dried up more than a little bit as neither pros nor hobby-ists feels the need to upgrade their cameras as often.

There is still a lot that Pentax can do and their slow release of new cameras means that each one will be heavily anticipated and will have to have real featured improvement (not like some of the past releases like K30 to K50 or K5 to K5 II).

So true. The K1 hits exactly the spot for folks shooting weddings and Bar Mitzvahs. The only pro I’ve seen with one said it couldn’t be beaten for the price, and you can actually make money with it. I see others using D800s with similar capabilities.

---------- Post added 05-20-19 at 05:46 AM ----------

I don't use AF.c or tracking. Pentax AF.S single point focus confirm is twice as fast an the Nikon's, but I do have to be better getting the focus point on the bird. I don't find that difficult, and it means I tell it to focus on the eye, as opposed to where ever it is the camera thinks it should focus. I don't want Pentax to bother with the continuous AF thing if it means Nikon first frame acquisition speeds, which as far as i can tell puts Nikon, Canon and Sony shooters at a disadvantage in all but their top of the line models.

I'd look at your images to see what you have, but, I can't find any.

Have you used a D500? I would have agreed with you until I did. There is zero advantage to any Pentax AF over that model IMO. Partly, it is the speed of SDM or lack threreof. The D500 and the Sony A7RIII give the photographer little reason to use anything but AFC, even for stationary subjects. Catching a BIF is so much easier, it feels like cheating.

For me personally, I have all the photos of birds around me on branches I need. I want to catch them in motion.

[Larrymc]

And now Digital Photography Review's CP+ 2019 interview:

CP+ 2019 Ricoh interview: Some users who bought mirrorless cameras will return to DSLRs: Digital Photography Review

Not a bad report of the interview all in all but the interviewers had to get their jabs in at Ricoh/Pentax and the Canicony fanboy commenters had to impart their negativity. DPR remains a site to avoid for me.

[Larrymc]

Those are the ones who get free cameras and lenses to promote their via online video logs, workshop, they aren't the pro live off making photographs. The pros who are living off making photographs are largely unknown to the public, they work for press and communication agencies who may eventually also print billboard sized poster, and 48" wide poster glued over urban areas. Basically, the commercial folks are the ones buying $20000 printers and cameras. We should not confuse people who claim to be pro for advertising camera gear but who do not actually generate income from taking photographs, and pros who are largely unknow to the public because they are full time employed in the image creation process.

My point precisely, but these 'social media influencers' are the ones the uninitiated follow and buy their recommended product brands. No one knows who the 'working professionals' are so these' working professionals' have no ability to influence anyone on a large scale basis.

[normhead]

Have you used a D500? I would have agreed with you until I did. There is zero advantage to any Pentax AF over that model IMO. Partly, it is the speed of SDM or lack threreof. The D500 and the Sony A7RIII give the photographer little reason to use anything but AFC, even for stationary subjects. Catching a BIF is so much easier, it feels like cheating.

Have you used the DA 55-300 PLM? Or a Tamron 300 2.8?

I could say that the speed AF.s locks focus with those lenses makes tracking pretty un-necessary. But where I live the bush is always so close BiFs is really not a thing. Yet when I get the chance I do fine.

I'm still not seeing any images.
I have no idea if you're getting images I can't. or that I'd even want, my own personal thought is that most BiF images are lacking in detail. So I actually don't know if you're keeping images I wouldn't toss.

Last time I went through this with Dan Renteria he didn't post a single image I couldn't have done with my K-3. Convince me. Words are cheap.

Or is they a "just take my word for it" kind of thing?
Like I'm going to spend thousands of dollars based on that?

I'm looking for information, not opinion.

After all, you're getting images I can't is based on you possibly not shooting the way I do. It's quite possible the superiority of your D500 is dependant on how you shoot and irrelevant to me. Although I have to say, the biggest disadvantage to a K-3 is the FPS gets cut in half when tracking. Given that every system takes more than twice as long as a K-3 to lock focus with tracking implemented compared to a K-3 in AF.s , I have no way of evaluating whether a D500 would get me shots or cost me shots

For me personally, I have all the photos of birds around me on branches I need. I want to catch them in motion.

.

I'm not seeing any evidence you succeed in catching anything. This sounds like a snob post, and there's nothing there to suggest different. Just some guy saying "my camera is better than yours" I got over stuff like that when I was five years old arguing "my father is smarter than yours". I shoot next to people shooting all kinds of different cameras. Reslts are not always as your post would suggest. Although I'm quite happy to acknowledge you have a personal preference fo the D500. No doubt it's better for you, even if we can't tell what that means in terms of image quality. If it makes you happy go with it.

[reh321]

Have you used a D500? I would have agreed with you until I did. There is zero advantage to any Pentax AF over that model IMO. Partly, it is the speed of SDM or lack threreof. The D500 and the Sony A7RIII give the photographer little reason to use anything but AFC, even for stationary subjects. Catching a BIF is so much easier, it feels like cheating.

For me personally, I have all the photos of birds around me on branches I need. I want to catch them in motion.

SDM?? Have you used the PLM lens?

[reh321]

I’m OK with the low light performance of the K3, because the resolution suits me. The one thing that keeps my old favorite K3 out of my hands is the AF. The continuous AF in the K3 already couldn’t keep up with my old D7200, but the D500 AF is like Krell technology compared to a K3. Auto focus points swarm to moving birds. Please, Ricoh, bring SAFOX and SDM into this decade. The ergonomics on the K3 and K1 are a big advantage over Nikon and Sony, but the result still needs to be in focus.

OK, so here you are comparing K-3 released in 2013 to the D500 released in 2016. I am quite sure that the D500 does do dynamic AF better even than my KP released in 2017; if dynamic AF is your primary interest, then perhaps the D500 is best for you - but don't expect Pentax to build a camera just for you. The D500 has an extra processor to perform AF; Pentax chose to devote their extra processor to tidying up images shot at higher ISO setting - and not surprisingly, every study I have seen shows that the $800 KP handles high ISO values better than the $1500 D500 does. Pentax has very much brought their cameras into the next decade, just not in the way you are wanting.


added: something in your words didn't seem right, so I checked; someone reading them would believe that the D7200 was "long in the tooth" when the K-3 was released, but in actuality the D7200 was released in March 2015, almost 1-1/2 years after the K-3 was released

[normhead]

OK, so here you are comparing K-3 released in 2013 to the D500 released in 2016. I am quite sure that the D500 does dynamic AF better even than my KP released in 2017; if dynamic AF is your primary interest, then perhaps the D500 is best for you - but don't expect Pentax to build a camera just for you. The D500 has an extra processor to perform AF; Pentax chose to devote their extra processor to tidying up images shot at higher ISO setting - and not surprisingly, every study I have seen shows that the $800 KP handles high ISO values better than the $1500 D500 does. Pentax has very much brought their cameras into the next decade, just not in the way you are wanting.


added: something in your words didn't seem right, so I checked; someone reading them would believe that the D7200 was "long in the tooth" when the K-3 was released, but in actuality the D7200 was released in March 2015, almost 1-1/2 years after the K-3 was released

Almost for sure a case of confirmation bias here. He talks about SDM as if it's the same in every lens. I doubt he has any of the "modern lenses for modern sensors" lenses that Pentax started producing for the K-1, with advanced AF speeds and algorithms. Just another guy comparing a camera system that hasn't been current for years with much more modern technology. "His comment, "I don't shoot birds sitting on branches" tells it all. He's a niche shooter with niche needs. No different than another forum shooter who compares his new Canon FF equipment with his old K-10D and then claims he "knows" Pentax.

[ehrwien]

The problem is that the vast majority of the recommendations are to Canon and Nikon. Folks just do not have an opportunity to find Pentax.

So much this. I can't even recall how exactly I came to consider Pentax or even know there exists another camera maker next to Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji.. But somehow I did stumble upon Pentax and the lovely folks here while deciding if I was gonna get a Nikon D3xxx with a nice standard zoom or a "more advanced" D5xxx with a normal kit lens. All the while I actually longed for something in the D7xxx line, because that would have been the "real" step up from entry level with bright real pentaprism viewfinder, two dials, integrated focussing motor etc... but they were too expensive and at the same time lacked features that their entry level cameras had, like tilty screen, wi-fi,...
and I'm really glad I found the K-S2 that gave me all the features I liked in the different lines of Nikon, but combined in a single body and offered at an attractive price. I was so close to making the wrong choice because I didn't even know I had a choice other than Canon or Nikon...

[reh321]

So much this. I can't even recall how exactly I came to consider Pentax or even know there exists another camera maker next to Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji.. But somehow I did stumble upon Pentax and the lovely folks here while deciding if I was gonna get a Nikon D3xxx with a nice standard zoom or a "more advanced" D5xxx with a normal kit lens. All the while I actually longed for something in the D7xxx line, because that would have been the "real" step up from entry level with bright real pentaprism viewfinder, two dials, integrated focussing motor etc... but they were too expensive and at the same time lacked features that their entry level cameras had, like tilty screen, wi-fi,...
and I'm really glad I found the K-S2 that gave me all the features I liked in the different lines of Nikon, but combined in a single body and offered at an attractive price. I was so close to making the wrong choice because I didn't even know I had a choice other than Canon or Nikon...

In 1979, when I purchased my first SLR, I purchased a Pentax because it and Nikon were the two I was familiar with, and I was hearing more positive things about Pentax than about Nikon. I moved to Canon in 1995 because I really liked their EF/usm AF solution. When I got tired of Canon bodies in 2014, I didn't know Pentax still existed, but then I found the Pentax Forum.

[Erictator]

In 1979, when I purchased my first SLR, I purchased a Pentax because it and Nikon were the two I was familiar with, and I was hearing more positive things about Pentax than about Nikon. I moved to Canon in 1995 because I really liked their EF/usm AF solution. When I got tired of Canon bodies in 2014, I didn't know Pentax still existed, but then I found the Pentax Forum.

In the film era I learned on my older brothers Topcon, then my own fully mechanical Minolta SRT101, as electronics became more integrated into cameras, I found the later Minolta's less than reliable and dropped them... I shot both Pentax & Nikon for wedding work... Nikon F3HP, then N8008 my first AF camera... for Pentax I shot 645 for weddings & the 6x7 for landscapes. When I threw in the towel for pro work I sold off my film stuff and looked into digital... I saw Nikon abandoning their legacy glass compatibility on everything except their top models and that kinda cheesed me off...I saw Pentax attempting to maintain compatibility all the way back to M42 mounts with adapters, and even could use my 645 & 6x7 glass with a K adapter if I wanted to and thought, wow, there is a company that thinks like I do!

I decided I'd try Pentax digital to "play and relax" with, so then I went with the *istD series, an awesome 6mp camera, and then several upgrades later to the K-1 I am still enjoying photography. Combine the K-1 with the latest HD FA lenses like my 150-450, and it's on! Pentax has turned out to be a great choice. For the most part, I have enjoyed Pentax bodies and glass... so here I am, just a duffer still with Pentax and still having fun. I guess I am in it for the long haul.
Eric