[bertwert]

Even the Ospreys I was following trying to get some decent nest approach shots laughed while I was trying to focus the 55-300. One Mama Osprey even launched a well deserved projectile white drizzle at me. Parked permanently. A/400 and manual was a breeze in comparison.

Yes, especially when they hover... not too challenging with the A 400...



(I wasn't paying attention to settings, so too slow shutter speed...)

[BruceBanner]

You are in Hulk mode today, aren't you?

lol... honestly not trying to be.

All I said was that this new K-new is quite important to me because it may signal a step towards me going with another brand, or hybrid shooting events, a Fuji one hand, a Pentax the other. Or... can I keep my focus purely on Pentax and feel all my shooting bases and scenarios are covered.
But of course this is PF, and suggesting such things is heresy and you get Pentax bashed! Oof! (and quite rightly so, I love a good telling off )

In one post you've twice accused all your fellow forum members of having low expectations, and labelled my view "bs". Nice work. Maybe we're just not as advanced as you, Eddy... or maybe - just maybe - everyone has different requirements, and their expectations are different to yours, rather than "lower". Anyway, you've made your views on Pentax pretty clear, now, even in advance of the new camera. To avoid edging into brand-bashing, I'd leave it there if I were you.

I'm afraid I don't have the appetite to respond further... I'm getting really tired of sticking up for my chosen brand, in its dedicated forums, against a relatively small few dissenting voices. I think I need a break...

K ease up, you should know by now that I mean no harm, those smiles and tongue sticking outs are meant to ease the pain and signal joking tones.

This has NOTHING to do with advance, level of ability behind the camera or any of that stuff. If Landscape was your primary focus, a source of income or any of that, K-1 is your man! I just have photography needs that are pulling me in different ways and find the shortcomings of some of Pentax's traits, which are not Pentax's fault, they are mine. Pentax never marketed the K-1 as a wedding camera, or a studio camera.

Photography is what we should be passionate about, not Pentax. Picking the right tool for the job. It's good to talk about other brands strengths and weaknesses and recognise where Pentax succeeds. If you read my posts properly you will see I give Pentax plenty of credit where it's due. I <3 Pentax, but I <3 Images more.

Eddy. Seriously. Man up and stump up the cash for the gear you need to forge ahead with your photography career. Take out a loan. The interest and depreciation are tax deductible.

The K-new will be great, but if it's not what you need, move on. No one cares what brand you shoot, so why should you?

And for what it's worth, I too keep in contact with Chris Rankin, and it's clear he still has a soft spot for Pentax. To my eyes, it is pretty obvious which of his shots are made with which gear. The Sony + 85/1.4 looks lifeless. I will grant you that the Fuji + 56/1.2 is legitimately gorgeous, but his older work with the FA77 and FA*85 (despite the likelihood that his technique has improved since then) just shines.

Man up? lol come look at my bank account, there's nothing manly inside.

I care what brand I shoot, or rather I care about the camera/lenses and how it all works together. It just costs money to jump around and play with other stuff. I'm not a tog so successful that I can afford those kinds of changes. It's BIG STUFF (I wish it weren't but it is, don't presume everyone has bank balances as healthy as yours).

I never said the Pentax stuff of Chris's is lesser, I just simply said that he enjoys the perks of the other brands in areas that are omitted from Pentax (which everyone seems to choose to ignore). When you shoot for a client they can't tell any difference at all between a Pentax pic and a Fuji, that stuff is reserved for us nerds (and even then many of us will trip up). Yes, the K-1 and FA Ltds are a special pairing, which is why changing brands would be so hard and also likely to be funded without the sale of said items because any tog worth their weight in gold knows how special those guys are. K-1+FA Ltd, totally acceptable for all sorts of professional work and will do it arguably better than the rest.

I would be interested to know which crop DSLR's that have been released within the last 12 months you think are significantly better than the D500 (especially regarding AF performance which is what this thread has more or less concentated on). I sold my K-3II & swapped over to a D500 about 18 months ago and IMO the autofocus is still better than anything out there at the moment bar maybe the newest of the Sony mirrorless bodies (but then we are talking crop DSLR's here as you are comparing to the Pentax K-new) and if Pentax can get anywhere near it then IMO then people wanting faster AF will be more than happy.

I also have to add (before I get shot down for being a Nikon user posting in a Pentax forum) that although the K-new is still a non starter for me due to long lens choice, I still use my K-1 and 15-30/24-70/70-200/150-450mm 99% of the time and the Nikon really only comes out at airshows and for BIF.

I'm just saying, D500 was developed 2015, we're 2020 now, tech has moved on, I for once hope Pentax push ahead not catching up with 5yr old tech that other brands have 'been there/done that'.

I know enough that if Pentax did actually catch up to AF at a D500 level, they could still be on to an absolute winner. Pentax has so many other things going for it that other brands lack that it could go down as thee crop camera to buy 2020! I hope it does.

And by the sounds of it you followed the right path, picked the right tool for the right job, that's what photography is about. I'm near the point you were at when you bought your Nikon D500, I'm juts waiting (and hoping) that I don't have to lose out on Pentax glass and lose funds by heading over to Nikon but instead the K-new will be enough.

But yes everyone, lets hate on Eddy for being open about his reasons why he might opt to buy another brand sometime in the future. I shall be your punching bag for this evening

Eddy, you know I admire your work, but can we just be clear about something:

Pentax isn't trying to compete with Canon, Nikon or Sony. It doesn't need to compete with them, and it would be commercial suicide for it to try to. All Pentax needs to do is sell enough cameras, mostly in Japan, to keep Ricoh happy.

When people talk about the digital camera market in general, they almost never lump Pentax in with SoCaNikon. If the Pentax name comes up, it's usually in the same context as Leica and Hasselblad -- a niche product for a niche market. Cameras for people who want to use legacy lenses on the brand of bodies and the native mount that they were designed for. And for people who want modern lenses that are a bit different from the norm, designed to have a uniquely Pentaxian character in the same way that Leica lenses are made to have that special Leica character.

Long term survival for Pentax depends on carving out its own niche in the market, and creating products for the sort of photographers who enjoy inhabiting that niche. If you think the grass on the other side of the fence will be more nutritious for you, that's great. But don't tell me that I've got low expectations because I happen to like the taste of the grass on this side.

I'm just saying that every member of public looking to buy a camera and turn their attention to a specific genre is competition. Nikon sell... cameras and lenses. Canon sell... cameras and lenses. Pentax sells... cameras and lenses. That right there is called competition. I'm sure Pentax would love to pull in some brand new sales from new non existing Pentaxians Making a good camera will help that cause. Making nice lenses will help that cause too;

Pretend it's 2021 and the K-new is available to buy. It's everything we wanted, a superb and capable wildlife/bird shooting camera. Now I have a new friend who wants to get into bird photography. Now I can actually bring up Pentax as a real option against Nikon and Canon (and keep my reputation intact ). That's competition. That's what Pentax wants. New sales.

The grass on Pentax's side is great! If your camera does all you need it to! But I have come across strong tunnel vision with Pentax users, they are often oblivious to the pace that other camera techs have been and gone too, all I wanted to emphasis is a K'D500'New is perhaps expecting too little? We might be happy with that, but will Pentax, will their sales? I hope they produce something that really shows some pace in moving forward and not the K-1>K-1ii, K70>KP kind of incremental steps where it all feels 'same ol same ol' is all I am trying to say. I'm actually rooting for Pentax here! I've said numerous times that the omission of the articulating screen is actually a promising sign imo. I hope they address what is often seen by many mainstream reviews as their Achilles heal, because if they do... Pentax will have a good year!

[noelpolar]

I've maybe shot a dozen or so "events" over the years with my pentax stuff.... where there is some expectation on me to "hit" lots of key moments (ie... as in weddings). Whilst this experience is minor compared to many here..... I know that if I was, say, transitioning from keen enthiusiest to professional (with my future income depending in it) I would most certainly be doing my due dilagence to ensure I had the best suite of tools moving forward..... and I doubt I would be using Pentax equipment as a pro wedding shooter (based on K1 ish generation). I'd want focus and buffer stuff to get out of my way if it could.... if the $$ worked for me at the time.

Of course this doesn't mean I would still not use some of my Pentax stuff for various tasks etc.

[Paul the Sunman]

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned yet in this thread (I'm not going to check through 54 pages), but one feature of the K-new that will be very interesting to see when it is eventually released is whether the noise reduction software is as rigidly baked in as on the K1 II. When the Mark II came out, there was a lot of angst about not being able to turn it off. Will Ricoh/Pentax have taken that into account and given us back a modicum of control?

[carlb]

Eddy. Seriously. Man up and stump up the cash for the gear you need to forge ahead with your photography career. Take out a loan. The interest and depreciation are tax deductible.

And given all the incentives on offer at the moment there's not going to be a better time to do it.........assuming it works for your particular business.

[reh321]

I'm not sure if it has been mentioned yet in this thread (I'm not going to check through 54 pages), but one feature of the K-new that will be very interesting to see when it is eventually released is whether the noise reduction software is as rigidly baked in as on the K1 II. When the Mark II came out, there was a lot of angst about not being able to turn it off. Will Ricoh/Pentax have taken that into account and given us back a modicum of control?

I believe they said at the last CP+ that it could not be turned off. “Baked in” simply means you cannot reverse the process. If you look at the photons-to-photos charts, it improves DR at the same time it reduces noise; my experience on my KP shows that it also enhances color fidelity. I don’t see any reason why a photographer would want to reduce color fidelity and lower DR.

[Dartmoor Dave]

I've maybe shot a dozen or so "events" over the years with my pentax stuff.... where there is some expectation on me to "hit" lots of key moments (ie... as in weddings). Whilst this experience is minor compared to many here..... I know that if I was, say, transitioning from keen enthiusiest to professional (with my future income depending in it) I would most certainly be doing my due dilagence to ensure I had the best suite of tools moving forward..... and I doubt I would be using Pentax equipment as a pro wedding shooter (based on K1 ish generation). I'd want focus and buffer stuff to get out of my way if it could.... if the $$ worked for me at the time.

Yes, no question about it. If I was going into the professional wedding business (which I've got no intention of ever doing) I'd be shooting a mirrorless system. The reliable face recognition AF and ability to shoot silently makes it a no-brainer. And if Eddy (@BruceBanner) wants to take his career along that path then he's really going to have to switch systems at least for his paid work.

But that DOES NOT mean that Pentax needs to start making a mirrorless system to try to compete with those who are already years ahead in that game. It would mean sinking a fortune into R&D with very little chance of making a profit on the investment. Pentax is getting by fine just doing what it's doing. It sells enough cameras and lenses to keep Ricoh happy, and it's no doubt seen by Ricoh as a brand name that brings some prestige to the corporate portfolio.

Pentax doesn't need to start making cameras and lenses specifically designed around sports and wildlife either. It isn't going after that market in the same way that Canon in particular does.

This is a gear oriented forum, so inevitably there's a common mindset that choosing a camera is a matter of listing up all the different features and then buying the camera that scores highest on the most metrics. But there's a huge number of photographers out there who don't actually think that way. People who choose a camera by looking at lots of photos on Flickr and buying the one that has a characteristic rendering style that they like. People who see themselves as way too cool to want a mass-market CaNikon and will go for a Pentax exactly because most people have never heard of it. The sort of people who own Pentaxes but wouldn't dream of joining this forum.

And there's one other thing we should remember: Pentax's primary market is Japan. What a thread like this boils down to is a bunch of people in geographical markets that Pentax isn't particularly interested in, demanding features that Pentax isn't particularly bothered about providing, then moaning that Pentax is mean for not satisfying their desires.

[repaap]

Based on some interviews, I suppose Pentax is not just looking things just based on their loyal userbase. Sure, that too. But there are several things these head of Pentax for example in France saying and the others, now this that they have really developed something new, kind a reflects that Pentax is not going to go with mirrorless, and are putting effort in making your photography more pleasant. Perhaps what can be read between the lines is that they also want to offer loyal customers alternative. That would mean something which can stand up with the competition. I’d not expect eye tracking, but something almost as good. Who knows. There have been several repports, and they do know what is missing. If no one is in hurry right now. Wisest thing would be to wait. This new K-new still looks like Pentax, I bet it feels like that too. But with better tech. This is what Pentaxians are waiting, right.

Edit: and new things are coming. This is what they have been saying, when tech is ready.

[clackers]

So the thing with the DFA*50 is that it's a great lens, makes incredibly beautiful pictures, but for less weight combined I'm bringing the M20, DFA 28-105 and either F50/1.7 or the 77 Limited on a hike or trip, and with those three lenses you can take very pretty pictures already. It's, of course, partly about cost (I've spent about the same for those 4 lenses* together as I would on a second-hand DFA*50), but most importantly it's a question of "how much use would this see?" and "is it worth the money when the same amount of money can also get you all of this".

See, you're another like me. A Pentaxian values these qualities, not the biggest, heaviest, latest.

I have the Sigma 35mm Art, but frequently head out with the K-1 and either my FA31 Ltd or even K28 f3.5.

I have the Sigma 85mm, but often take the FA 77 Ltd or even K 85mm f2 instead.

I get superb quality in these small packages, and really only miss out on that fraction of pictures where f1.4 makes a meaningful difference to f1.8.

We're not the only forum members who think like that, but all companies - Sigma, Canon, Sony, Nikon and Pentax - are going with large, expensive premium lenses because low margin, high turnover doesn't work anymore.

I think Pentaxians are less ostentatious than other brand owners, and love a second hand bargain more than them too, so we're a frustrating customer base for the Star lens designers. The DFA*50 may never have been made if Tokina didn't agree to resell it as the Opera in EF and F mounts. They must be very worried about the upcoming DFA*85!

[Serkevan]

See, you're another like me. A Pentaxian values these qualities, not the biggest, heaviest, latest.

I have the Sigma 35mm Art, but frequently head out with the K-1 and either my FA31 Ltd or even K28 f3.5.

I have the Sigma 85mm, but often take the FA 77 Ltd or even K 85mm f2 instead.

I get superb quality in these small packages, and really only miss out on that fraction of pictures where f1.4 makes a meaningful difference to f1.8.

We're not the only ones who think like that, but all companies - Sigma, Canon, Sony, Nikon and Pentax - are going with large, expensive premium lenses because low margin, high turnover doesn't work anymore.

I think Pentaxians are less ostentatious than other brand owners, and love a second hand bargain more than them too, so we're a frustrating customer base for the Star lens designers. The DFA*50 may never have been made if Tokina didn't agree to resell it as the Opera in EF and F mounts. They must be very worried about the upcoming DFA*85!

I understand the DFA*50 - it's one of those lenses that screams "this company knows what they are doing". I also guess that the kind of person that has a 645Z is probably overlapping with the person who wants a DFA*85 - I'm sure that Ricoh will be profiting enough off of it. But I think that stuff like the D FA 21 Limited is what really gets most of us in that anticipating glee

[clackers]

When people talk about the digital camera market in general, they almost never lump Pentax in with SoCaNikon. If the Pentax name comes up, it's usually in the same context as Leica and Hasselblad -- a niche product for a niche market.

Dave, I think in this ruined camera market, it's a pretty good position to be, aspiring to be like a Japanese Leica.

Nikon, Sony and Canon are the market leaders, so by definition have the most to lose when it shrinks to 1/6 of the 2011 market or whatever.

Will Nikon ever make back the money they must have spent on going to mirrorless Z mount, or are there just going to be writedowns?

[UlrichSchiegg]

There is a place for both.

At least in my bag.

[clackers]

Then I sent it to Precision where they fixed it and returned in something like six weeks, and the focus was so far out of whack that I had to return it to have that calibrated.

...

I certainly wouldn't tell that tale to anyone I'd recommend the brand to.[COLOR="Silver"]

Seems to be no shortage of horror stories about Precision in the US, Thor.

Of course, you realize they're also the Sony official repairer in the States?

[normhead]

No-one knows what will happen with Nikon or Canon in future, so maybe they could go the way of IBM. My point was, if you recommended IBM back then, you were recommending a good system that ticked all the basic boxes. No-one could fault your recommendation if they bought that IBM system. That there may have been even better systems for specific applications was understood. IBM, though, was always a solid choice.

My school board, was IBM only, What nightmare that was. It took me 5 years but I got them into a comparative field test with Apple. After 6 months for media, the initial higher cost for the Apple's was 1 tenth what it was for the IBMs. By the time I retired all 17 board media labs were Apple, Of course the IT department in their vindictiveness made sure I got the last lab, 3 month before I retired.

I spent hours after school trying to get a Cad Cam machine my Principle dumped on me working.(the second time in my career that happened)

On my 7th call to the support line after 20 hours of unpaid work the following conversation took place.

"Support "You're not using an IBM are you?"
Me "yes we are".
Support "AUtocad doesn't work on IBMs"
Me "Why not?"
"We don't know, it just doesn't."

IBM love extended way past it functionalism and the folks going "IBM, IBM. IBM" were unproductive overpaid and for the most part unnecessary.
I was working at Computer Mart of Detroit when the first IBM was released. The big car companies bought them sight unseen, (and then started hiring huge IT departments) dumped their Apples with no evaluation whatsoever.

So while I agree, IBM was the safe bet to recommend, it was quite often not the best bet. And the IBM crowd is just another example of herd mentality. True believers. The difference being at one time IBM was the only game in town. Meaning people got used to them and trusted them, because their was no one else in the game.

There simply is no excuse for seeing Canon, Nikon and Sony in the same light. They were never IBM. They were never the only game in town, and if you look at it, the majority of the cameras they sell wouldn't meet Pentax standards.

So, I would pretty much reject that opinion outright.
But then, I was taught to look past "common wisdom" which is often neither common, nor wisdom. I definitely have "The underdog deserves an honest shot with a level playing field." As we know from sports, sometimes tings don't turn out the way the prognosticators believe they will. So they coin terms like "upset". As if that somehow absolves them for being little more than a herd mentality picking favourites.

"Team A upsets team B" should really read, "All of us media types were wrong. We don't know as much as we think we do."

[ThorSanchez]

This is a gear oriented forum, so inevitably there's a common mindset that choosing a camera is a matter of listing up all the different features and then buying the camera that scores highest on the most metrics.

In particular I pay attention to one metric: Does the camera meet my needs? And a Pentax that has much improved action and sports functionality will do that much better than one that is just focused on landscape and similar work.

I think that Ricoh looked at its market and realized that it can't continue to lose customers to other brands by solely focusing on the areas where it has historically done well. If you're getting paid to shoot weddings like BruceBanner, you're not using Pentax. If you're shooting sports, you're not using Pentax. If you're shooting birds, you're probably choosing another brand. If you want a mirrorless system, you're going somewhere else. If you want great service and support in the US you're not choosing Pentax I think Ricoh said "Enough! We're going to go ahead and try to compete in a few of these areas." They're a business, and there are only so many cameras and lenses they can sell to retired landscape shooters who can't stand EVFs.

---------- Post added 05-24-20 at 09:32 AM ----------

Seems to be no shortage of horror stories about Precision in the US, Thor.

Of course, you realize they're also the Sony official repairer in the States?

I didn't know that, that's funny.